The Senedd met in the Chamber and by video-conference at 13:30 with the Llywydd (Elin Jones) in the Chair.

1. Questions to the First Minister

Good afternoon and welcome to this afternoon's Plenary meeting. The first item on our agenda this afternoon will be questions to the First Minister, and the first question this afternoon is from Rhianon Passmore.

The Construction Industry

Rhianon Passmore AC: 1. What assessment has the Welsh Government made of the challenges facing the construction industry in Islwyn? OQ59542

Mark Drakeford AC: Llywydd, runaway inflation, supply chain bottlenecks and skills shortages all face the construction industry in Islwyn and across Wales. The Welsh Government works closely with the sector to address these significant challenges.

Rhianon Passmore AC: Thank you, First Minister. The Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors monitoring for quarter 1 of 2023 found that there was a 67 per cent reported shortage in quantity surveyors, a 54 per cent reported shortage in other construction professionals, and a 61 per cent reported shortage in bricklayers. In Wales, construction workloads have increased, almost entirely driven by publicly funded house building projects and other public sector works. Whilst many Welsh chartered surveyors expect employment levels to increase over the next year, the apparent skills shortage across the sector means that many firms will struggle to recruit staff that they require. So, First Minister, we know that Wales and the United Kingdom needs a Labour UK Government who can begin to rebuild the shattered and decimated economy of the United Kingdom, much like the post-war Labour Government of Clement Attlee rebuilt Britain after world war two. First Minister, in the meantime, what actions are the Welsh Government taking to ensure that Islwyn and Wales have enough suitably qualified people in this vital sector of the construction industry?

Mark Drakeford AC: Well, Llywydd, I thank Rhianon Passmore for that. We certainly know the prescription offered by the UK Government—it's 'let them pick fruit'. That was yesterday's message from the Home Secretary. She said, of course, they would need to be specially trained to make sure they knew a strawberry when they saw it, but the idea that, after 13 and more years of a Conservative Government, that is the best they have to offer people in the United Kingdom tells you everything you need to know about the current state of thinking in the UK Government.
The Member for Islwyn is absolutely right, Llywydd, that the construction industry is busy in Wales, but it is busy because of the pipeline of public-funded projects that this Government continues to pursue across Wales. Private house building is falling here in Wales, and in the constituency of Islwyn, for example, 84 new homes for social rent and shared ownership are being constructed in Blackwood, and nearly £6 million of the investment needed for that will come directly from the Welsh Government.
We go on working with the industry to invest in the skills that will be needed for the future. But it's true as well, Llywydd, that the industry itself must invest. It must make sure that it sets out career pathways for young people—young women and young men—showing them how the skills that they can acquire can be put to good use and how there will be careers for them in the future. It's a partnership approach that is needed. It's why, here in Wales, Ministers chair the construction forum. It will meet again in July. The Minister for Economy and the Minister for Climate Change will both attend, and, together, we will address the challenges that undoubtedly exist for the sector.

Laura Anne Jones AC: First Minister, in 2022, the Welsh construction output reached £5.7 billion. However, this has been part of a gradual decline since 2004, when the output was nearly £7 billion. Construction businesses in Wales contribute to 14 per cent of all employers—a crucial pillar of the Welsh economy. The latest Qualifications Wales release of data showed that, by the end of 2022, there was a 7.9 per cent decrease in certificates awarded for construction, planning and the built environment sector, as you just outlined, compared to the end of 2021. So, First Minister, what actions are you taking to ensure that this doesn't become a long-term trend and that we can attract more people into the construction industry? You just said that it is needed, so why hasn't action been taken sooner by this Government?

Mark Drakeford AC: Well, what lies behind the figures quoted by the Member are the choices that young people are able to make. And it's why I said in answering the original supplementary question that this has to be a partnership between the industry itself and Welsh Government. Welsh Government is investing in the skills, in apprenticeship programmes, in modern methods of construction, making sure that the skills young people acquire will fit them for the future. The industry has a responsibility to make the jobs that it is able to provide attractive to those people there in the labour market. Young people are a sought-after commodity in the Welsh economy, and there are many other sectors competing for those young people. That isn't a job for the Welsh Government alone; that is a job for the industry as well, to tackle some of the reputational issues that affect the choices that young people make, to make sure that young women are comfortable in building sites and in construction projects. The industry has a job to do to make sure that its image and the reality live up to one another, and that the effort that the Welsh Government wants to make alongside the industry is met by the steps that the industry itself needs to take.

Council Tax Premiums

Gareth Davies AS: 2. What assessment has the First Minister made of the impact of council tax premiums for second home owners in Denbighshire? OQ59537

Mark Drakeford AC: Llywydd, the ability to charge council tax premiums has been welcomed as a mechanism for local authorities to help address the impacts that second homes and long-term empty homes can have in their communities.

Gareth Davies AS: Thank you for your response, First Minister. The reason I want to raise this question with you today is that I recently had a meeting with Mr and Mrs Williams from Cwm near Dyserth, with our MP for the Vale of Clwyd, Dr James Davies. The couple converted an old stable into guest accommodation, but their business was severely hampered by COVID-19 and, during this period, they reported the use of over-zealous collection methods from Denbighshire County Council in attempting to collect the 50 per cent council tax premium, and then the couple were threatened with endless letters and threats of legal action. They paid the fee out of fear of litigation, but later found that they weren't subject to the charge. After much personal anguish and distress, they were rightfully reimbursed nearly £5,000 by the council. My question to you today, First Minister, is that if this is the course of action you are taking, then could the due diligence be conducted in a way that doesn't impact on my constituents? And what checks and balances can you implement on the delivery of Welsh Government policy in the local authority context to make sure the additional charge is administered both ethically and respectfully?

Mark Drakeford AC: Llywydd, I don't think it's possible to draw general conclusions from a single instance. Of course we expect council tax, including premiums, to be sensibly administered by local authorities. But I've faced many questions in the past on the floor of the Senedd, both when I was housing, local government and finance Minister, and since, from Members of the opposition, asking what we are doing to make sure that the council tax is effectively collected by local authorities. So, it's a balancing act that local authorities have to administer. It's absolutely right that they pursue bills when they are due, but we expect them to do that in a way that is sensitive to individual circumstances, is proportionate in the actions that they take, but, where there are bills that are there to be paid, the whole system depends upon local authorities being effective in having those collection mechanisms.

Questions Without Notice from the Party Leaders

Questions now from the party leaders. The leader of the Conservatives, Andrew R.T. Davies.

Andrew RT Davies AC: Thank you, Presiding Officer. And with your permission, could I wish the leader of Plaid Cymru all the best now he's stepped down from the leadership of that party? I would like to thank him for the courtesies he's extended to me during our time as being leaders of our various groups here. Our politics are completely different—and I'm sure he'll enjoy that endorsement—but it is always good outside of the political environment where you can share a light-hearted moment and enjoy each other's company. And I genuinely wish him all the very best for the future and that of his family as well.
First Minister, the Ernst and Young report seems to be doing the rounds. I appreciate it's a confidential report, and it was brought up last week in this Chamber, and you confirmed that you had not had sight of that report. I hope that you went from this Chamber and made yourself familiar with the report; I know the health Minister has had sight of it. There are some damning assessments of the function that the health board undertook in awarding contracts and conducting genuine business of the health board in spending public money. Can you give us what your assessment is of that report today, please, because it does warrant action on behalf of the Welsh Government to instil confidence that this type of behaviour will not be repeated again?

Mark Drakeford AC: Llywydd, I take a different approach to the leader of the opposition—I don't go looking for reports that have not been made available to me, when those reports are meant to be confidentially held amongst those people who have a legitimate right to access them at this point in the process. I tried to make these points last week. There is a process here. The report is not a report of the Welsh Government. The report is owned by those who commissioned it—that is the board of Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board. There are people who are named in that report, there are people who are likely or may face action taken against them as a result of that report. That is why the report ought not to be in circulation in the way that the leader of the opposition described. I am sure, because of the assurances I have had, that the board are taking the report seriously, that they will discharge the responsibilities that now lie with them now that the NHS counter-fraud organisation has concluded that there are no further criminal charges that it wishes to pursue as a result of the report.

Andrew RT Davies AC: First Minister, this is a health board that is in special measures and run by the Welsh Government. This is a report that was raised with you last week, and, in fairness, it was a legitimate line of defence that you hadn't familiarised yourself with that report. Given the seriousness of these allegations—and I didn't go and seek out this report; it was sent to me, as it has been sent to others, because people have genuine concerns over the contents of the report—it cannot be hid behind confidentiality and a mask of secrecy. The actual measures that you brought forward back in February tried to put the entire blame on the independent board members of the Betsi Cadwaladr health board in north Wales, who were forced to resign. This report clearly identifies executive overreach and management decisions that were taken based on information that was withheld from the board. So, surely, those independent members, who were forced to resign on the basis of what's in this report, are owed an apology by the Welsh Government. And will you make that apology today and confirm that the Government is acting in unison with the health board that is in special measures to address these concerns in the Ernst and Young report?

Mark Drakeford AC: Llywydd, Betsi university health board is not run by the Welsh Government. I don't think it's difficult for the leader of the opposition to grasp this. The legal obligations for the conduct of that board, including the legal obligations to respond to the report, which they themselves commissioned, lies with the board itself. That is just inescapably a matter of where legal accountabilities lie. As I explained, I am confident, from what I have been advised, that the board will take all that very seriously. Now that it's in a position where any action lies with them, rather than with those who made an assessment of criminal liabilities, they will act on the basis of the report that they have received. And I'm afraid Members here who want to jump the gun, who want to quote reports that they have no legal standing in having seen, and who expect me to follow them down that, I believe, very mistaken—very mistaken—course of action, will find that they will not find me doing so. It's for the board to take action. There are people whose careers are at stake here. Whatever you think, those people have rights that have to be respected. The board will do it in that way and that's the right and proper way for things to be done

Andrew RT Davies AC: You accuse me of jumping the gun, First Minister. Back in February, when the health Minister offered the ultimatum to the independent board members, it was proven that the Welsh Government were, a month prior to that, seeking out replacement independent board members. Isn't that jumping the gun, First Minister? We are talking of people who've put themselves forward for public service to try and improve the communities they live in, and their careers were thrown to the wayside. This report crystallises the wrong information that the board was given, how documentation was readjusted and dates altered, and how, ultimately, major contracts were awarded to companies—major contracts running into millions of pounds were awarded to companies—based on cosy deals between people who were in the position to award those contracts and the companies. That cannot be allowed—that cannot be allowed—and it is our job as politicians to expose that on the opposition benches. I bitterly regret that you have been unable today to apologise to those independent board members. I bitterly regret that you have not been able to give an indication of what actions the Welsh Government is taking in light of the Ernst and Young report. So, is it just more of the same, First Minister? It is the people of north Wales who will suffer, and the patients and staff in Betsi Cadwaladr who will suffer, because of the inaction of the Welsh Labour Government.

Mark Drakeford AC: Well, Llywydd, let me just make three points in answering the leader of the opposition. Firstly, the actions to be taken as a result of the report will be taken by the board. Legally, they are responsible for it; they will discharge those responsibilities. That is the way in which the system has to operate, not in the way that he has attempted to operate it this afternoon, spraying around a series of accusations from a document that most people here will not have seen. The leader of the opposition may well wave a document in front of us that he should not have seen. Does he not realise—does he not realise—is his grasp of proprieties so redundant that he does not realise that quoting to me a report that he has received through means that are not legitimate is not the way in which business can ever properly be conducted? Thank goodness—thank goodness—the conduct of government is not in the hands of people whose grasp of right and wrong in these matters is so completely, so completely, in the wrong place.
I certainly don't apologise for the actions that have been taken in order to put the board of Betsi Cadwaladr in the place where it needs to be. I'll tell you this, I think, for certain, Llywydd, that had we not taken action on the basis of the reports that we have seen, which are properly in the public domain, which report to the fact that that board was simply no longer able to operate, if the Minister had let that lie there and had done nothing, I would certainly be facing questions from the leader of the opposition this afternoon. Of course the Minister was right to ask, and of course—of course—any responsible government, thinking ahead to courses of action that it may need to adopt, was right to prepare for those eventualities. What people in north Wales will want to know is that, since those actions were taken, further measures have been put in place to strengthen the board. New members of the board have been recruited, additional specialist and independent advisers have been secured to make sure that, where mistakes were made in the past, they will not be repeated in the future, and, where individuals have questions to answer, the board will make sure that those questions are asked and the actions that are necessary will be properly pursued in the way that anybody who has a legitimate interest in the proper conduct of public affairs in Wales would wish to see them pursued.

The leader of Plaid Cymru, Adam Price.

Adam Price AC: Thank you very much, Llywydd. I have tried to keep the focus of my questions over the last five years or so on issues of national importance, in line with the convention, but, as I prepare to return to the backbenches and serve the people of Carmarthen East and Dinefwr—the people of the Amman, the Gwendraeth, the Towy and the Teifi—who have put their faith in me over two terms, in two Parliaments, and free once again of other responsibilities, I hope that I'll be forgiven for focusing on something a bit closer to home today, although it does have an important national dimension too. Will the First Minister give us an update on the commitment made in the budgetary agreement between Plaid Cymru and the Welsh Government in the last Senedd to introduce a Llandeilo bypass? And, in your view, does the agreement in terms of a way forward in the case of Llanbedr in Gwynedd demonstrate that it is possible to couple the need for a local bypass with our shared commitment to face the greatest challenge of our age, namely the climate emergency?

Mark Drakeford AC: Well, Llywydd, I thank the leader of Plaid Cymru for his question. Of course, he and I came to an agreement to explore options to accelerate the plans for a Llandeilo bypass back in December 2016, when both of us had different responsibilities. In the final budget for the year after 2016, £50 million was set aside in that final budget to do more to inform that purpose. Since then, the plan has gone through the different stages of the WelTAG process. Welsh Government officials met officials from Carmarthenshire County Council to discuss proposals just before Christmas, and more recent correspondence has been issued since then. I'm happy to confirm today that the Welsh Government continues to be committed to the agreement on this issue, which is noted in the most recent budget documentation. We are continuing to work on options to develop the Llandeilo bypass plan. Llywydd, I agree with what Adam Price has said about the example of the improvements to the A496 in Llanbedr in Gwynedd. The sustainable solution that we agreed upon there is one that we can capitalise on as we move the commitments made in Llandeilo forward.

Adam Price AC: Thank you very much. Staying in the Towy valley, I'd like to raise an issue that will also have broader relevance. The Green GEN company intends to create a corridor of pylons 60 km long from Radnorshire to Carmarthen. The Government's policy at the moment is to encourage undergrounding wherever possible, whilst noting the need to take cost into account. Will the Government commission an independent study on undergrounding, drawing on recent innovation in terms of setting cables through ploughing and international good practice, for example, the underground 60 km link in Friesland in the Netherlands, and the 700 km link proposed in Germany? Shouldn't we use the technology of the twenty-first century as we decarbonise rather than the technology of the 1950s, the last century? And is the Government is a position to announce a national plan for the electricity grid that looks holistically at the needs of Wales for the future?

Mark Drakeford AC: Llywydd, I answered a question on this last week from James Evans and I explained that the specific proposal that Plaid Cymru's leader is referring to is likely to be designated as one of national significance. The process that will follow will include Welsh Ministers as decision makers. I cannot say anything about this that has any appearance of making a prior decision.
Generally, of course, I do agree with what Adam Price has said about the importance of using the most recent technology in this area and about learning from experiences thus far. The Minister who has responsibility over the National Infrastructure Commission for Wales is seated here this afternoon and I'm sure that she will give careful consideration to the specific point that the Member has made about its work programme.

Adam Price AC: They tell me that I've asked over 400 questions to two First Ministers since I became leader of my party in September 2018. May I take this final opportunity to thank you, First Minister? Leading a party is not an easy task, but it is even more difficult to lead a nation and your commitment and your personal sacrifice, particularly over recent challenging years, are a source of everlasting debt and gratitude from all of us.
I would also like to take the opportunity to thank everyone who has worked with me; everyone who supports us here in the Senedd; to you, Llywydd, for your quiet advice and patience; and to everyone who has shown me kindness over the past few days. My final thanks, but the most important thanks, go to my family, who are here today and looking forward, I'm sure, to seeing a fair bit more of me over the next few years ahead.

Adam Price AC: First Minister's questions has always been more duty than pleasure to me. I think I may be speaking for us both there, despite the fact that you've become annoyingly good at this part of the job. [Laughter.] Though I've often felt like a promising student being handed back a B minus with a look of theatrical disappointment, I've always treated this aspect of the role with the seriousness it deserves. Good government needs good scrutiny, and accountability is the bedrock of any democracy, not just for governments, but oppositions too, and that means not just seeking responsibility in others, but accepting it oneself, painful though that sometimes may be.
But the wellspring of hope in politics lies most fully not in finding fault, but in finding solutions, and that is always, everywhere, a collective endeavour. In the middle of the storm, you must cling to your anchor. The crucible moment for me to which I always return is early one morning in 1984, at the side of the road outside Betws mine, where I stood at dawn in my school uniform, the rain running down my cheek, arm in arm with my brother and my father, my mother's words of determined encouragement still ringing in our ears: a picket line that suddenly, instinctively surges forward as one to become a human shield, to defend not ourselves but one another. In a sense, my entire political life has been a continual search for that sense of unity and solidarity in the struggle for justice and equality.
It's in these last 16 months that I have found those resources of hope again—that politics can change lives. And in deciding to change lives together, we can change the nature of politics itself, so that the striking miner's son, once on free school meals himself, helps make them universal; that the young activist who occupied an executive home, gold taps and all, in Carmel, Carmarthenshire during the 1988 Newport Eisteddfod helps create the most radical package of measures on the housing crisis seen anywhere in the United Kingdom; that the English monoglot boy from Amman Valley comp helps create a future Cymru where Cymraeg belongs to all. That is not down to me. That is down to us—a sense of us that you and I and our colleagues shaped between us. For what is the social in socialism and the national in Welsh nationalism if not the idea that there is something that connects us beyond our own self-interest, bigger even than the narrow confines of party loyalty?
And so perhaps, as I leave this leader's lectern behind me, I can be candid about the political truth that dare not speak its name. We disagreed on many things, perhaps most notably Welsh independence, though I'm not alone in thinking that your performance as First Minister has often felt like an extended audition to become, in the future Welsh republic, our version of Michael D. Higgins. But, for all our disagreements, there was always—[Interruption.] It is a compliment coming from this side. [Laughter.] But, for all our disagreements, there was always a common core.

Adam Price AC: 'Mabon and Caeo; Keir Hardie and Crug-y-bar.'

Adam Price AC: We are two socialists from Carmarthenshire, hewn from the same root, on the left wing of both our parties, who, through design or default—we will leave it to others to decide—have ended up implementing policies in many areas more radical than either of our manifestos. But, beyond us, there is a deeper truth that will outlast us—that in this place what unites most of us is ultimately more important and more enduring than anything that divides us. This Chamber is circular for good reason. Making sense of the Senedd means you must understand that we're not here to create a mini Westminster, but to build a better Wales, together; to be not an arena of antagonism, but a Senedd in search of a new synthesis, where the different truths we represent are combined anew in pursuit of the common good.
It took a long while for this gay council-house boy from Tumble to have pride in himself. I never would have believed back then that I would get to sit in this chair. I want the youth of our country, women and men in equal number, every race, every creed, LGBTQ+ and disabled, the working class especially, to feel as if this place belongs to them, represents them, speaks for them, as much it does for anyone. I want them to see people like them occupying my chair, your chair, every chair. So, as we commit now to widening the circle of this Senedd even further, will you promise me, Prif Weinidog, to build on the work that, between us, we've begun, to turn this place for the future of our nation into the most fully inclusive 360-degree democracy anywhere, where every voice is heard equally, so every life can be lived equally, fully and well, so I know and you know we've used our time together here to the best of our shared purpose? [Applause.]

Mark Drakeford AC: Well, Llywydd, could I say at the outset thank you very much to Adam Price for the very kind personal things that he said at the outset? It's great to see his family all here today in the Senedd, and it was a privilege once again to meet your mother on the way into the Chamber this afternoon.

Mark Drakeford AC: There's a great deal in what the leader of Plaid Cymru has said this afternoon, Llywydd, with which I entirely agree. Of course he is right: we disagree on many things, and that's the beauty of our democracy, that we can do that, and we can do that here while knowing that, behind those individual examples of disagreement, there lies an enormous amount of agreement about the purpose of politics here in Wales, which is exactly as the leader of Plaid Cymru has said—ambitions shared, I think, across the whole Chamber, expressed in very different practical ways, but united in the belief that what we do here belongs not to us, but to the people who put us here, and our ambition always is to try to make things better for them in ways that they would recognise as reflecting their circumstances and their preferences.
Adam Price said, Llywydd, that in his politics he was dedicated to finding solutions, and let me say to the Chamber, having spent many hours together finding ways of turning the co-operation agreement between our two parties into those practical actions, that is exactly my experience of working with the leader of Plaid Cymru. I've often thought in politics, Llywydd, that there are only two classes of people: there are people who come through the door when there is a problem to be solved whose instinct is to make that problem even bigger, to find even more things that you've now got to address, to find even new angles of difficulty that you haven't yet come across, and then there is another group of people in politics who, when they come through the door and there is a problem to be solved, their instinct is to find solutions, to look for ways in which common ground can be forged together. And I feel that I have been fortunate, during the 18 months that I've worked with the leader of Plaid Cymru in the co-operation agreement, that that has always been the way in which he has come to the table.
So, while we will go on differing, I'm quite sure, in the future about many things, the fundamentals—and particularly the point that the leader of Plaid Cymru made towards the end, about the way in which, beyond today, we will bring forward legislation to reform this Senedd to make it fit to discharge the responsibilities that people in Wales put in our hands, and to make sure that the people who arrive here in the future fully reflect the diversity and the nature of today's Wales. I look forward to the next 18 months, to bringing that piece of legislation in front of the Senedd, to debating it robustly, but always to do it in the spirit that we've heard from Adam Price this afternoon.

And, indeed, Adam Price, true to your word, you did test the patience of the Llywydd with the length of the contribution of your final statement. [Laughter.]

But best wishes to you, Adam, for your future in this Senedd.

Question 3, James Evans.

Gilestone Farm

James Evans MS: 3. Will the First Minister outline how the Welsh Government plans to engage with the local community over the future use of Gilestone Farm? OQ59507

Mark Drakeford AC: The Welsh Government will work with the local community council, Powys County Council and the Bannau Brycheiniog National Park Authority to promote constructive community consultation on the future use of Gilestone farm.

James Evans MS: Diolch, Prif Weinidog. In March, the economy Minister wrote to me in reply to a letter I sent to him, in which he asked for my support in ensuring that the local community were provided with accurate information on this matter. Subsequently, on 6 April, the Minister informed me that he'd be using the community council to inform members of the community about the proposal. That all seems reasonable to me. However, subsequently, after several resignations from the community council and them only having three current members, residents in Talybont are rightly concerned about the community council's ability to provide them with the accurate information that they require.
First Minister, the community is divided over this matter and some good faith and engagement from the Government would help in bringing the community together. I have, therefore, following representations from the community, organised a meeting in Talybont on 8 June and I've invited the Minister and officials from Welsh Government to attend. So, First Minister, can you confirm today, to me and the community, that you will ensure that someone from your Government will attend that meeting, so that the community can get the accurate information that the economy Minister has previously asked is provided to the community?

Mark Drakeford AC: Llywydd, I entirely agree about the importance of accurate information being provided. The way in which we will do that is the way I outlined in my original answer. It is working with organisations on the ground that have a democratic mandate and are purposed for that end. I'm not convinced that a public meeting is guaranteed to provide more light than heat on these matters. I take very seriously what has happened in the community council and very seriously what has been said by the local Liberal Democrat member of Powys council. Llywydd, Members here may have seen her reports of bullying and harassment from some of the plan's opposers:
'a constant barrage of threats and aggressive criticism, designed to undermine and discourage.'
That is not, I'm afraid, an encouraging context into which to expect officials of the Welsh Government to be propelled.
I want to have exactly what James Evans has said this afternoon. I want to have an informed discussion; I want to make sure that facts are genuinely available to anybody who is interested in them, but I want to do it in a way that allows some of the heat that has been seen in that debate to be toned down and a greater emphasis on proper information sharing and reasoned debate. And I'm not convinced, I'm afraid, that a public meeting of the sort that the Member has described is the best way, at this point, to bring that about.

Allotments

Janet Finch-Saunders AC: 4. Will the First Minister make a statement on the provision of allotments across Wales? OQ59501

Mark Drakeford AC: Llywydd, our allotment support grant has earmarked £1.3 million over the next two years across local authorities to help improve and increase allotment provision. In addition to this dedicated fund, other programmes, such as the Community Land Advisory Service, also support the development of allotments.

Janet Finch-Saunders AC: Thank you. Now, I've been wanting to raise this topic with you, especially so when I know that you yourself appreciate the benefits in terms of well-being that having your own allotment can bring—picking fruit, for one. I think that was lost on some Members, but, anyway. [Laughter.]
Our natural environment and nature benefit from the use of allotments in terms of the seeds sown, the flowers grown and the vegetables harvested. During Mental Health Awareness Week, I wanted to highlight the benefits of our allotments as an alternative therapy. Now, only last Thursday, it was a delight to welcome my colleague, Laura Anne Jones MS, to Ysgol San Sior to see the children in their allotment. In a very enterprising manner, they use their enterprising skills to grow flowers for display at Venue Cymru conference centre. They also have beehives.
Now, despite all the well-being aspects of growing vegetables and flowers, over the past few years, First Minister, I've not seen any real growth in the number of allotments made available, and I have constituents requesting these. Now, given the many benefits I have mentioned today, how can you work with our local authorities, in addition to what you've already said you're doing, to ensure that they make available some of this public land? There are swathes and swathes of public land available that could actually be converted quite successfully to allow more people to have allotments. How can you, as First Minister, perhaps persuade, influence or simply request our local authorities to do this? Diolch.

Mark Drakeford AC: Llywydd, first of all, let me agree with Janet Finch-Saunders about the mental health benefits of allotment holding. I was lucky enough to be on my allotment at the weekend, together with the pigeons and the rabbits and the slugs and everything else that has already seen off the green beans that I put there a week before. But nevertheless, it was a great pleasure to be out in the fresh air and enjoying all the benefits that Janet referred to. I very much congratulate the school that she mentioned. So many of our schools do fantastic work, making sure young people enjoy the practical activity of seeing things grow. Great to hear that they have beehives at the school as well.
The Welsh Government, as I said, Llywydd, has an allotment support grant. I'm pleased to be able to tell the Member for Aberconwy that we have potential projects submitted by Conwy council for the current financial year, designed to bring back into use dilapidated and derelict plots in Old Colwyn and Llanfairfechan. We look forward to working purposely with the local authority in their efforts, because the statutory duty in the end is with them to provide allotments, where there is a demand, to increase the number of plots we have in Wales, but also to do more to bring back into beneficial use plots that already exist but where the conditions don't meet modern expectations, including disability access and other things, because we want to see allotment gardening, with all the benefits that it brings, available to the widest number of Welsh citizens.

Vikki Howells AC: I share the Member for Aberconwy's enthusiasm for allotments. First Minister, in Rhondda Cynon Taf the council has used Welsh Government funding to create new allotments to meet local demand, including, for example, in Abercynon and in Aberaman in the Cynon Valley constituency. In the process, the council is bringing back derelict land into use, improving accessibility, and increasing biodiversity. With the provision of additional allotments bringing so many benefits, how is Welsh Government working with local authorities to ensure that the new allotments that are being created are of good quality and have that improved accessibility?

Mark Drakeford AC: I thank Vikki Howells for that, Llywydd, and very much agree with her that the work of Rhondda Cynon Taf County Borough Council is an exemplar in this field. In the last financial year, we were able to take forward three different projects with the council, including, as she will know, plots at Aberaman and Nant-y-fedw in Abercynon. There are proposals for the current financial year that would bring surplus land into use to create more than 20 new plots at Tylorstown and Ynysybwl.
Behind the specifics of the allotment support grant lies the Community Land Advisory Service, and that is where local authorities can get the help they need to make sure that when they are looking to increase plot numbers, bring derelict land back into use, upgrade the facilities on allotment plots that already exist, they're able to do it in the way that Vikki Howells said, making them as accessible as they can be, making sure that the facilities that are available make the enjoyment of allotment gardening as available to as many people as we can. The combination of additional funding and specialist advice, I think, puts us in a very good place.
The resilient green space project, Llywydd, which also operates in this space, will support the creation of up to 600 new allotment plots, and the regeneration of 200 existing plots over the coming years—answering, I hope, a point that Janet Finch-Saunders made in her supplementary question—to make sure that we are expanding the range of possibilities for allotment holders in every part of Wales.

Tourist Trails

Ken Skates AC: 5. What steps is the First Minister taking to promote Wales's tourist trails? OQ59538

Mark Drakeford AC: I thank Ken Skates for that. This is the Year of Trails in Wales. The theme allows all participants in the tourism industry to showcase trails that feature the fantastic culture, adventure and landscape experiences to be found in our country. I was very pleased to enjoy part of the iconic Wales Coast Path trail over this past weekend.

Ken Skates AC: Diolch, First Minister. Of course, to celebrate Wales Tourism Week, Members across the Chamber, I'm in no doubt, will be visiting a good number of our finest tourist attractions. They provide a great opportunity to also explore the magical, adventurous trails that unite them. Would you agree that, with an exciting and adventurous tourism offer, we don't just grow the visitor economy, but we also make Wales a place in which it's desirable to live, to work and to learn?

Mark Drakeford AC: I thank Ken Skates for that, and thank him for drawing attention to the fact that this is Wales Tourism Week, a very important industry in all parts of Wales. The Year of Trails is designed to contribute to our ambition for the sector—that we spread the sector so that it operates in more parts of the calendar year; that we bring tourism opportunities to more places in Wales, not just the hotspots that everybody knows about; and that people spend more money when they get here. The fact that in Wales we have a greater number of world heritage sites than you would ever expect for a country of our size gives us an opportunity to create a UNESCO trail in Wales in which people would be led from one opportunity to another. I intend to raise, in a preliminary way, in discussions that I will have with the Governments in Brittany and in Ireland over coming weeks, the possibility of a UNESCO saints trail. We already have saints trails here in Wales, and when I was in UNESCO in Paris a few weeks ago they said to me that they thought the future of their world heritage designations lay in co-operation between different nations. Bringing Wales, Brittany and Ireland together to create new possibilities would go even further to realise the advantages that Ken Skates mentioned in his supplementary question.

Tom Giffard AS: First Minister, you've already mentioned the Wales coastal path as being our pre-eminent tourist trail here in Wales. I know you've had your say in the past about your favourite part of the Wales coastal path. It won't be a surprise to you—it's not the first time I've disagreed with you, First Minister—that obviously the Gower peninsula would be my personal choice. But to properly enjoy the Gower peninsula, I think, requires an overnight stay. I think really to do it justice, I don't think you can do that in a single day. As a result, the pre-eminent way to spend a night on the Gower peninsula would be in self-catering holiday let accommodation. I visited one such business on the Gower peninsula just over a week ago, and they said to me that they were concerned that they would not reach the new Welsh Government tax threshold of 182 days. They'd never done that for the 20 years that they operated that particular business. They were worried that they will be forced to close. I understand that we have a philosophical difference on this policy, First Minister, but I wonder whether the Welsh Government has done an impact assessment on the number of self-catering holiday lets that will be forced to close as a result of the Welsh Government's changes in this area.

Mark Drakeford AC: Let me just correct this complete misapprehension. No business is forced to close because they don't let for 182 days. They simply are not able to take advantage of small business rate relief and will have to pay council tax like everybody else. Nobody is forced to close if you get to 180 days and you don't get to 182. The system is not designed, and never was designed, to do that. I am much more optimistic than the local Member. I think the Gower peninsula is a fantastic place to stay, and I think many, many businesses will already be letting for 182 days. The new arrangements will be an incentive for even more businesses to do that, bringing even more people to enjoy the beauties that the Gower peninsula provides.

Local Development Plans

Llyr Gruffydd AC: 6. Will the First Minister make a statement on the Welsh Government's role in developing local development plans? OQ59536

Mark Drakeford AC: I thank Llyr Gruffydd for the question The Welsh Government sets the framework for drawing up local development plans. It's a matter for each local planning authority to fulfil its statutory duty to prepare a sound local development plan.

Llyr Gruffydd AC: You're right that it is a matter for local planning authorities in the first instance, but you'll also be aware that Wrexham County Borough Council has rejected its LDP recently, and the question people are asking now is how will the Welsh Government respond to that. Will you and the relevant Minister, for example, accept the local view and allow the proposed plan to be withdrawn, or will the Welsh Government force the plan on the council and the population against the wishes of residents in the area?

Mark Drakeford AC: Of course I'm aware of the position in Wrexham. It's an extraordinary sequence of events where a local authority approves its own plan as being sound, submits the plan, which is its plan, which it has confirmed as sound, to the planning inspectorate, the inspector confirms that the plan is sound, and then the local authority rejects its own plan. It seems to me that the citizens of Wrexham thought they were electing a council fit for a city and have ended up in Clochemerle. I read the leader of the council saying that 'Wrexham is in a good place because we can start again.' Ten years of work went into producing that sound plan, and the council, advised by its own chief executive, by its own chief planning officer, by its own chief legal officer, that the plan should be adopted, wilfully, it seemed to me, failed to discharge that responsibility.
I'm afraid the answer cannot be, 'So, what is the Welsh Government going to do about it?' This is the responsibility of the local authority and they cannot discharge that responsibility by trying to make difficult decisions the responsibility of somebody else. Of course the Welsh Government will be responding to the local authority, and our response will be to them that they need to take the responsibility that is theirs. They should stop being the only local authority in Wales that does not have a local development plan. Because I can tell you what will happen, Llywydd. When I was first elected to this Chamber, Cardiff didn't have an adopted local development plan, and Cardiff West, my constituency, has far too many examples of where housing developments took place that were never designed for housing developments, which were opposed by local people, and where the council lost every case because it didn't have a local development plan adopted that could defend the planning regime for which it is responsible. That will now happen to the residents of Wrexham until the local authority faces up to its responsibilities and makes the right decision.

Sam Rowlands MS: Of course, First Minister, it's one thing developing a local development plan, it's another thing delivering on it. For many local authorities in north Wales, they are struggling to deliver on local development plans because of the phosphates legislation and regulations that are in place at the moment. Indeed, we know that there are nearly 1,000 social homes in north Wales that are not able to be developed because of the phosphates legislation, preventing many people having homes built and supporting our homelessness crisis here in Wales. First Minister, I know there was a summit around phosphates earlier this year—I believe it was in March or perhaps April time. I wonder if you'd be able to update the Senedd as to the progress on that and how we're going to help support local authorities in delivering on the local development plans and not just developing them.

Mark Drakeford AC: I thank the Member for that question, because these are important points. None of us wants to see developments held up where they are necessary, in exactly the way that the Senedd has now heard, but neither are we prepared, as a Government, to solve that problem by making another very serious problem even worse. The summit was about devising new solutions to that challenge by making sure that every partner comes forward with a part that they can play. I was encouraged by the fact that there were new ideas as to how planning permissions could be granted, and promises of investment to mitigate the impact of new housing development when that mitigation is necessary. I’m very keen that we move forward with those ideas quickly, and that we release land for development where we are convinced that the phosphate problem now has been properly addressed. We will have a further meeting of all partners before the summer is over in order to make sure that people are delivering on the commitments that they have made. I look forward to land being released for those very necessary housing purposes, but not at the expense of making the phosphate difficulties that we see in our rivers already worse than they otherwise would be.

Huw Irranca-Davies AC: First Minister, let me be the first to say I absolutely love local development plans. I sit there into the wee small hours in the winter evenings poring over them, because it is one of the few chances you have to actually—[Interruption.] No, no; bear with me—have a glimpse into the future of what communities will look like: green corridors, wildlife corridors, active travel routes, where housing will be, where commercial enterprise will be, where retail parks will be—not simply to block development, but to enable development to happen in the right place. They’re at their best when businesses and residents, councillors, community councillors and Members of the Senedd sit down of an evening with a cup of tea or a glass of whisky and go through them page by page. So, First Minister, would you join me in sending out a message from this Senedd Chamber today that local development plans are not dry and dusty, boring documents—that they’re pivotal to the future of thriving, lively communities, and we want everybody to sit down of an evening with a shot of whisky and take their time poring over them?

Mark Drakeford AC: It’s an exciting prospect that the Member for Ogmore sets out for us. Where I definitely do agree with him is that local development plans do indeed shape the future. My anxiety for people in Wrexham is that, without such a plan, they will see their green spaces and their green corridors now at the mercy of people where there isn’t a plan to protect those places. I read the whole debate that was held in Wrexham County Borough Council and I was astonished to read people arguing that if you didn’t have a local development plan you somehow wouldn’t have any development—that it would be the end of development because you didn’t have a plan. Exactly the opposite is true. Now you will have uncontrolled and unplanned development. The reason why people do spend time—community councils, interested local groups, as Huw Irranca has said—looking through the detail of local development plans is because you can see there where the future of those communities will lie. Of course, for anybody with an interest, it would be worth their time to do that, and in 24 of the 25 local planning authority areas in Wales, they have a plan that does just that.

Improving Health Outcomes

Paul Davies AC: 7. Will the First Minister outline what the Welsh Government is doing to improve health outcomes in Preseli Pembrokeshire? OQ59500

Mark Drakeford AC: I thank Paul Davies for that. The Welsh Government works with Hywel Dda University Health Board to secure improved health outcomes for its local population. Across a range of population health measures, including on life expectancy at birth, the health board outperforms the Welsh average.

Paul Davies AC: First Minister, in order to improve health outcomes it is vital that people can access vital health services. Sadly, the latest grades from the sentinel stroke national audit programme show that there need to be some serious improvements in stroke care in the Hywel Dda University Health Board area. Rehabilitation services like physiotherapy, occupational therapy and speech and language therapy are vital for stroke survivors to make the best possible recovery, and yet the latest grades show that services have indeed worsened in Pembrokeshire. So, First Minister, given the importance of getting stroke services and support right, can you tell us what the Welsh Government is doing urgently to improve stroke services and care for patients in Preseli Pembrokeshire?

Mark Drakeford AC: I agree about the importance of stroke care services. It’s why we have had national leads in place for stroke care and why we will continue to work with the local health board to make sure that the reports set out in the national audit are attended to properly. But I just return to where I started, Llywydd: in terms of health outcomes, including outcomes for events such as stroke, the local health board, and Pembrokeshire in particular, outperforms the rest of Wales. So, Pembrokeshire has lower smoking rates than Wales, lower obesity rates than Wales, it has better life expectancy for men and for women, and it has a better healthy life expectancy. That means that the underlying causes that actually have far more to do with health outcomes than services themselves are on the side of that local population. Then, they need the services in the way that Paul Davies has said, to make sure that, when things do go wrong, they know that there will be the help necessary for them to have as fast and effective a recovery from strokes as would be possible.

And finally, question 8, Samuel Kurtz.

Supporting Business Growth

Samuel Kurtz MS: 8. What action is the Welsh Government taking to support business growth in Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire? OQ59504

Mark Drakeford AC: Llywydd, investment in skills, infrastructure and emerging industries form the bedrock of Welsh Government support for the business growth in the Member’s constituency. The recent successful Celtic free-port bid is an example of that approach in action.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Thank you for your answer, First Minister.

Samuel Kurtz MS: I have recently been contacted by a manufacturing company in my constituency that has a unique opportunity to double its workforce in a short period of time, driven by the product that it manufactures and its relationship with the Ministry of Defence. They would require infrastructure investment and building expansion too to fully capitalise on this opportunity. While they are excited by this opportunity, they remain concerned that any help available through Business Wales or the Welsh Government will take too long to access, or too long to deliver.
First Minister, what guarantees can you give this company that Welsh Government support will operate in a timely and responsive manner, given the tight deadlines that commercial businesses operate within? Diolch, Llywydd.

Mark Drakeford AC: Well, my advice to the company is simple, Llywydd—it's to get on with contacting Business Wales as fast as they can, to make sure it provides the best possible information, as quickly as it can. And, then, I know that the people on the ground who do this work on behalf of the Welsh Government will want to make sure that, whatever help is possible will be delivered to the company in as timely a way as possible.

2. Business Statement and Announcement

Thank you, First Minister. The next item is the business statement and announcement, and I call on the Trefnydd to make that statement—Lesley Griffiths.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Diolch, Llywydd. There is one change to this week's business. The statement on the national care service expert group report's implementation plan has been postponed. Draft business for the next three weeks is set out on the business statement and announcement, which can be found amongst the meeting papers available to Members electronically.

Darren Millar AC: Trefnydd, I'd like to request a written statement from the Deputy Minister with responsibility for the armed forces in Wales on the Welsh Government's support for service children in the education system. You may be aware that Ysgol Pen y Bryn in Colwyn Bay in my own constituency was recently given a silver award as part of the Supporting Service Children in Education in Wales's fantastic armed forces' friendly schools initiative, which, of course, encourages schools to embed very good practice for supporting service children, to create a positive environment for service children to share their experiences and to encourage schools to become more engaged with their local armed forces community.I know that you'll want to join me in congratulating Ysgol Pen y Bryn; it was the first school in Wales to get this prestigious award. But I think we'd all like to know what further work the Welsh Government can do to promote that particular scheme in other schools across Wales.
And, in addition, I note that the First Minister is going to be making a statement on international relations in a few weeks' time on 13 June. I have to say that I was troubled yesterday to receive an e-mail inviting Members of the Senedd to attend a meeting of the cross-party group on Wales International, focusing on—and I quote—'Wales and Vietnam—a success story'. Now, it appears to want to celebrate Wales's international links with Vietnam, but may I remind everybody in this Chamber that Vietnam is a communist police state that persecutes religious minorities, has a dreadful human rights record, and serious limitations on people's liberties and freedom of speech? Any and all communications between Wales and Vietnam should be constructive, but also critical, drawing attention to these facts, and I think it's a horrific mistake to praise our relationship with Vietnam as a success story while these issues persist.
I'd be grateful, Trefnydd, if you could give assurances that the First Minister will address some of these concerns in his statement on 13 June.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Thank you. I wasn't aware that Ysgol Pen y Bryn had won a silver award, but very well done to them, and to be the first in Wales is a great accolade.As you know, the Deputy Minister for Social Partnership makes regular statements in relation to our armed forces, and I'll certainly see if she can encompass that in her next statement.
With regard to your second point, the reason for that is that the ambassador for Vietnam will be in the Senedd on that day. I think that invitation came about following the First Minister meeting the President—

Mark Drakeford AC: The Prime Minister.

Lesley Griffiths AC: —the Prime Minister, sorry, of Vietnam, back in the Conference of the Parties, along with the previous one but two Prime Ministers, Boris Johnson.

Delyth Jewell AC: A few weeks ago, Merthyr council rejected an application for the Ffos-y-Frân opencast coal mine to continue operating, to the relief of climate campaigners. But drone footage and photographs have shown that coal mining has continued in that area, in spite of the absence of planning permission. Now, I understand that the Welsh Government has said that responsibility for this lies with the council, but campaigners have contacted me in disbelief that the council hasn't enforced their decision. Coal mining has continued, in direct contravention of the council, of the climate crisis, and the wishes of nearby residents. Coal Action Network wrote to me and others last week, pointing out that the failure to stop this illicit activity had, by last week, resulted in 270,000 extra tonnes of coal being mined, adding 840,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide to our climate crisis. And those figures will have kept creeping up in the days since. So, could a statement please set out what the Welsh Government will do to exercise its own powers to stop this coal mining, because the company seems intent on ignoring what the local authority has told them?

Lesley Griffiths AC: Thank you. We have received allegations that the operator is still coaling, but I do think, from what's been assessed, the allegations seem to be based on members of the public observing coal being transported from the site, rather than evidence of excavations. Plans are not ongoing for the planning application there, as you say, it was refused at committee by Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council last month, in line with officer recommendations. And the operator doesn't have the option of appealing the decision; obviously, that decision would be for the determination of Welsh Ministers, so I can't say any more.

Mike Hedges AC: I want to ask for two Government statements. The first is a Government statement on providing an update on the devolution of the aggregate levy. The Silk report on financial devolution recommended the partial devolution of income tax, the devolution of stamp duty, and landfill disposals tax, which have happened. It also recommended the devolution of the aggregate levy, which was stopped by the European Union. Now that we are not subject to European Union rules, what progress is being made in devolving the aggregate levy?
I'm also requesting an update on the Swansea bay and west Wales metro. I'm aware that studies with Welsh Government and local authorities are taking place, to develop plans to provide better connectivity within south-west Wales, and the potential of a faster service between west and south Wales. Can the Government provide a progress report on this project? I speak as somebody who comes from Swansea; we seem to hear an awful lot about the north Wales metro, an awful lot about the south Wales metro, based upon Cardiff, but there seems to be almost complete silence on the Swansea and west Wales metro.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Thank you. I think you asked me a question a few months ago—probably about three months ago—around the aggregate levy and the devolution of that. I don't think there's been a huge amount to update you on since that time. As you say, aggregates are a valuable Welsh natural resource, and we absolutely recognise that the devolution of the aggregates levy could be beneficial to both our fiscal and our environmental aims. So, we do continue to be open to further conversations with the UK Government on possible devolution of the levy, recognising that there are a number of key issues that I think have to be considered—in particular, the potential cross-border and block grant impacts that could arise from the devolution of that levy. We're also really interested to learn from the Scottish Government's experience, as they move forward in their approach to developing a devolution of Scottish aggregates levy, so we can apply that learning to our future considerations.
In relation to your second point, on the west Wales metro, our regional transport support will change the way that we travel. The Deputy Minister is obviously working to create a very modern, sustainable rail, bus, cycling and walking network to create a range of different parts of the transport network. And I know that that is going to be playing a critical role as we move forward with our regional metro—as you mentioned, obviously, the north Wales metro and the south Wales metro. And obviously, each region has very different needs, dependent on their rurality and geography.

Mark Isherwood AC: I call for two statements. Firstly, a statement from the health Minister, on diagnoses of coeliac disease. This is actually Coeliac Disease Awareness Week, 15-21 May, and coeliac disease is a serious lifelong illness, when the body's immune system attacks its own tissues when gluten is eaten. In a written answer I received from the health Minister, today, she states that the Welsh Government has no plans to develop a specific pathway for coeliac disease at this time in Wales, but that she expects all health boards to take full account of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence's clinical guidelines in the planning and delivery of services.
One in 100 people have coeliac disease and they need to know what steps the Welsh Government is taking to tackle the challenge of under-diagnosis of coeliac disease in Wales and, in doing so, enable the more than 200,000 people across the nation, as yet undiagnosed, to get the answer they deserve, and what plans the Welsh Government has to reduce the 13 years it currently takes an adult in Wales, from the onset of symptoms, to receive a diagnosis of coeliac disease. I call for a statement accordingly.
Finally, I call for a statement from the Deputy Minister for Climate Change on the Wrexham-Bidston rail line. The Wrexham-Bidston Rail Users’ Association committee issued a statement, after meeting on Friday, 24 March, and unanimously agreed that something
'has to change as TfW appears incapable of delivering an acceptable service on the Wrexham-Bidston line'.
They added that:
'This Association is not alone in voicing its criticism; other Rail User Groups have the same concerns about this operator’s incompetence'.
I'm quoting. And that:
'There is already a chorus of voices saying that the Wrexham-Bidston line should be transferred to another operator...with a better focus on the Mersey-Dee region',
and that
'the Welsh Government should instigate an independent review of TfW to determine where the root cause of the problems lie and what needs to be done to rectify the situation'.
And, they said that with Transport for Wales running its first Class 230 battery-diesel hybrid train in passenger services on the Wrexham-Bidston Borderlands line, the maintenance plan is based on having just two trains in service, increasing to three in the medium term, and that it will be a significant waste of public money if all five class 230s do not enter service rotating with four in service and one out in maintenance at standby.I therefore call for a statement on that matter also. Thank you.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Thank you. I'm grateful to the Member for raising the fact that it's Coeliac UK's awareness week. It is a disease that affects, as you say, a great many people, and I'm very pleased that you've had an answer to your question today from the Minister for Health and Social Services. I think it's good to be reminded that many of our constituents do suffer from coeliac, and I thank Coeliac UK for having this awareness week this week.
In relation to the Wrexham to Bidston line, there have clearly been some major issues. I'm sure you've seen the many buses parked outside Wrexham general station, as have I, but I'm very pleased that Transport for Wales now do have their new class 230 trains on the line, and I hope those difficulties now have been rectified.

Sioned Williams MS: Trefnydd, today, Chwarae Teg launched their report on the working experiences of women over 50 in Wales. The report reveals that too many women over 50 felt invisible, overlooked by employers, Government and society. Additionally, the report discloses that many women in this age group face barriers to remaining in work and experience disadvantage and discrimination within work. Caring responsibilities are preventing women over 40 from progressing their careers, and the menopause affects many women's ability to work, with 27 per cent of women having taken time off due to menopause symptoms, but fewer than half had told their manager the real reason for their absence. The gender pay gap also widens with age, reaching 21 per cent for women aged 50 to 59. As I'm sure you'll agree, these findings highlight the need for more work to be done by the Welsh Government in reducing the discrimination that women over 50 face in the workplace. So, I'd like to ask for a statement, please, regarding an update on Welsh Government's strategies to help combat this issue.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Thank you. We are working very hard to create a more equal and prosperous Wales, where everyone has got an opportunity to play their full part in our economy and our society. And supporting older workers to stay in work does offer employers, I think, a rich source of talent and experience, and provides a catalyst for a much more inclusive workplace overall. You raised a very important point, I think, about caring responsibility. Older people are much more likely to have caring responsibilities, and that's why I think it really is important to have flexibility in the workplace, as a means of attracting people to that workplace but also of retaining employees there as well.
Again, I think the point you raised around the menopause is really important, and I know that, in the Welsh Government, we've recently identified a menopause champion to make sure that that subject is discussed at an official level, but there's also ministerial input as well.

Vikki Howells AC: Trefnydd, you will be aware of recent calls from the European Students' Union for the UK to rejoin Erasmus+. The union described the decision to leave the scheme as 'foolish and self-destructive', and I know that the Welsh Government has also condemned the decision that is bad for Welsh students and bad for Welsh universities. I'd welcome a statement from the Welsh Government setting out its continued support for the UK to rejoin Erasmus+ and, also, how Taith can be used to bridge the gap for Welsh learners in the meantime.
Secondly, I continue to be concerned about the numbers of children and young people using e-cigarettes and vapes. I know that both the Welsh Government's smoke-free strategy and the tobacco control delivery plan talk about working with children and young people to help them remain smoke free and better understand the role that e-cigarettes play, but please could we have an update from Ministers on this important work?

Lesley Griffiths AC: Thank you. I think 'foolish', 'destructive' and 'very short-sighted' is a fair analysis of the UK Government's decision. It became very clear very quickly, I think, that they were absolutely entrenched in that decision to withdraw from Erasmus+. As you say, we now have Taith. The Welsh Government took very swift, I think, and decisive action to set up Taith and ensure young people in Wales continue to have life-changing international exchange experiences. Taith absolutely puts learners in Wales at the heart of the programme, with additional funding available for those from disadvantaged backgrounds, disabled people and those with additional learning needs. I just think it has gone from strength to strength. It's been there now for just over a year, and we've seen funding awarded to support almost 7,000 inward and outward mobility activities involving learners and staff from right across Wales and the globe.
You make a very important point, I think, around e-cigarettes and vapes. As you know, we do have our smoke-free Wales strategy and the tobacco control delivery plan. We are seeing smoking rates in children and young people falling, but, of course, we can't be complacent. The plan does set out the way we will take action to protect children and young people from second-hand smoke, for instance, as well as trying to denormalise smoking in our society, and I think that's where vapes do, unfortunately, normalise that. We published our new tobacco strategy, 'A smoke-free Wales', back in July of last year. Our ambition is for Wales to be smoke free by 2030, and that does set out three themes that will drive our actions, one of which is future generations. 'Towards a Smoke-free Wales' 2022-24 is the first two-year delivery plan, and that sets out the actions we'll take forward, and I will ask the Minister to bring forward a written statement.

Altaf Hussain AS: Trefnydd, could I request a statement from the Minister for Economy regarding the redevelopment of Baglan bay? The Welsh Government purchased the former BP Chemicals site from St Modwen at the beginning of the year, but there have been scant details of these plans. The land consists of around 900 acres, which includes parts of freehold interest in the Baglan Energy Park, which was acquired for £1.75 million. It is unclear what the Welsh Government's intentions for this site are, but given that Ministers now own part of the freehold for the energy park, and with the creation of the Celtic free port, I would hope that they plan to exploit the synergies between the two. The potential benefit from green hydrogen alone is enormous. Therefore, could I request an oral statement from the Minister for Economy outlining the Government's plan for Baglan bay? Thank you very much.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Thank you. I will ask the Minister for Economy to bring forward a written statement at the most appropriate time. I'm not sure whether that will be before the summer recess, but I will certainly ask him to do so.

Heledd Fychan AS: Trefnydd, following the publication of new statutory guidance for elective home education through a written statement last week, there is a new expectation that local authority officers do have to assess the appropriateness of the education provision that every child taught at home receives. According to the guidance, this needs to include a face-to-face meeting with the child or young person and their family, as well as looking at a diversity of evidence sources. I'd like to ask for an oral statement from the education Minister explaining what preparations have been made in terms of the workforce to ensure that local authorities have skilled individuals to undertake this very complex task of deciding whether the home education provision is appropriate, and what additional resources have been allocated to implement these new statutory guidelines. I have had dozens of e-mails arriving about this, and I'm sure other Members will have also received e-mails over the last few days, and there is so much concern among this community. I do think we need greater clarity than a written statement can provide.

Lesley Griffiths AC: As you say, this was announced last week by the Minister for Education and the Welsh Language, and he remains committed to strengthening that support that is available to home educators, and £1.7 million has been provided to local authorities to support EHE. That funding is unique to Wales—I think that should be pointed out. Seeing and communicating with the child supports the rights of the child, and that helps local authorities fulfil their statutory duty. So, I think what those meetings will do, that you referred to, will be to provide an opportunity for the local authority to develop a positive relationship with families and allow home-educated children to be able to share their views on home education. The Minister is currently reviewing legal advice in respect of the database, for instance, and having a look at other options for the implementation, so I don't think a statement is appropriate at the current time.

Jenny Rathbone AC: There's been a lot of fanfare over the Prime Minister's farm-to-fork summit that's taking place in Downing Street today, and it is absolutely right that that should be taking place in light of Which?'s analysis of the doubling of basic foodstuffs—things like protein, like fish, meat and cheese, and vegetables, and even own-label budget items that most people on restricted incomes rely on from supermarkets to be able to afford to eat. So, I was very pleased to read in the Prime Minister's letter to farmers that there will be no chlorine-washed chicken and no hormone-treated beef on the UK market, not now, not ever—that's a really good and strong statement—but no mention of how the UK Government plans to address the fruit and vegetable supplies crisis that is gathering pace. Spain has announced a €2 billion investment in the crisis in southern Spain, but the European Commissioner for the environment has said this is probably far too little too late and that the drought disaster in Spain is likely to also impact on southern France, Italy and Germany as well. So, the likelihood of supplies of vegetables and fruit arriving in this country any time soon is really, really worrying. I just wondered if we could have a statement from you, Minister and Trefnydd, about how we are going to resolve what is a very serious situation.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Thank you. I was aware of the Prime Minister's farm-to-fork summit that was held at No. 10. I think it's probably just about finished. I wasn't invited, but he very graciously allowed one of my officials to attend. I did send a senior official, because I do think this is a really important topic. I'm always saying it has to be looked at across the UK. Food security, food supply are integral across the UK; we can't do it on our own, so I'll be very interested to hear the outcome of the summit.
You'll be very well aware, as we've had lots of conversations, Jenny Rathbone, around horticulture and what we're doing. But probably what I'll do is bring forward a written statement when I've had the opportunity to listen to my official, to hear what went on today, because it was a surprise that this summit was held today. But I am very pleased, and I was very pleased to hear the Prime Minister's comments that you referred to, because we certainly didn't get that assurance from his immediate couple of predecessors.

Gareth Davies AS: Could I ask for a statement from the Minister for Finance and Local Government this afternoon—I'm sure your ears are burning there, Minister—around the Rhyl Drift Park? I've been contacted by many constituents from the Rhyl area. It's an adventure playground that’s had to make way for sea defences on the prom, and, where we welcome sea defences in the area, it’s sadly made way; it was a popular adventure park in the area that attracted visitors, both near and far, as it had unique playing facilities and was enjoyed by many local children and children from further afield as well. I’ve set up a campaign as it’s become quite an issue in the town, and my petition’s received hundreds of signatures, really, and it’s attracted a lot of national media. I was contacted by The Guardian and also BBC Newsround, who’ve been interested in running a story, and I’m just seeking a Welsh Government response today on your view of the benefits of play for children in terms of their development in their early years, and also the benefits it gives for socialisation within communities and also their ability to develop more throughout their formative years. Also, will you join me in calling on the local authority to relocate the park to another area in the town?

Lesley Griffiths AC: Well, I wasn’t aware of your petition around the park that you're referring to, and I don't think it would be for the Minister for Finance and Local Government. You asked a couple questions, so if you're asking for a written statement around the importance of play for children, that would be for the Deputy Minister for Social Services. I think Wales has always put play right at the fore for our children; you only have to look at the foundation phase brought forward by Rhodri Morgan when he was First Minister to see how important play is for children.

Rhys ab Owen AS: Trefnydd, could I ask for two statements, please? As you know, this week is Dementia Action Week, and this year the important thing is timely diagnosis, and the important message that many of us, unfortunately, are able to agree with is that this is not about getting old, but about getting ill.

Rhys ab Owen AS: 'It's not called getting old, it's called getting ill'.

Rhys ab Owen AS: Research by Alzheimer’s Society Cymru suggests that one in five people in Wales waits for more than six months before talking to a professional health worker about their concerns about possible dementia symptoms that they or a relative might have. We now know that drugs do show very promising signs of slowing down the deterioration of memory and cognitive skills where early diagnosis is made. So, I’d like to ask for a statement from the health Minister about the work that the Welsh Government is doing to promote accurate and timely dementia diagnosis.
And secondly, Trefnydd, over the weekend, more than 100 people marched from Pentyrch to Rhydlafar to show how impractical it is to move the surgery from Pentyrchout of the village. Can we have a written statement, please, on guidance for health authorities on consultation with communities before taking decisions? Thank you very much.

Lesley Griffiths AC: It is indeed Dementia Action/Awareness Week, and, just looking round the Chamber, it’s good to see Members from all parties displaying lapel badges to support the week, and, as you know, the theme of this week is supporting early diagnosis, and that’s absolutely a key area of our dementia action plan, and the plan’s backed by £12 million of funding and outlines Welsh Government’s commitment to support people living with dementia and their families.
In relation to your second point, I don’t think that would be an issue for a written statement; that would be a matter for the health board and the local authority.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Trefnydd, I would like to urgently call for a statement from the Deputy Minister for Climate Change regarding the safety of the A477 road in my constituency. On Saturday, my constituent Ashley Rogers was involved in a road traffic collision whilst riding his motorbike at the Nash Fingerpost junction between Milton and Pembroke Dock on the A477. The 29-year-old died at the scene, leaving behind an 18-month-old son and his devoted fiancée Jess. The family are completely broken, and I pay tribute to Ashley, and send my sincere condolences to his family and friends.
This is not the first and, if the Welsh Government don’t act, it won't be the last accident on this stretch of road. Since I was elected two years ago, I have repeatedly raised with the Deputy Minister the serious safety concerns along the A477 and explicitly at the Nash Fingerpost junction. In a response I received from the Deputy Minister on 22 October, there was a pledge to, I quote, 'progress consideration of the technical report recommendations when funding becomes available.' But he added that, 'Due to competing priorities and pressures across Wales, funding is not available for this scheme this year.' I'm sorry, but this is not good enough, not for Ashley and his family, and certainly not for the other fatalities that have occurred on this stretch of road. Frankly, it's unacceptable, especially given that safety concerns had been raised over a decade ago by the MP Simon Hart.
I'll leave you with the words of one of Ashley's family members who wrote to me, saying, 'There have been numerous accidents there, and unfortunately very many deaths. It needs to be changed now. Not next week. Not next year. But now. Please stop the Welsh Government from spending money on wasteful issues and find the money to change this road junction.' Diolch, Llywydd.

Lesley Griffiths AC: I was extremely sorry to hear about the incident you refer to, and I'd like to pass on Welsh Government's condolences to Ashley's family.
Welsh Government takes road safety very seriously, and we do await the latest details of the accident you referred to from the police, to help inform if measures are required to be implemented at this location. As I think probably the Deputy Minister explained to you, we've undertaken a road safety review of the A477 Nash Fingerpost junction, and that scheme will be evaluated again, along with other eligible schemes, as part of this financial year's allocations.

I thank the Trefnydd.

3. Motion under Standing Order 16.5 to establish a Senedd Committee

Item 3 is next, the motion under Standing Order 16.5 to establish a Senedd committee, and I call on the Trefnydd once again to move the motion. Lesley Griffiths.

Motion NDM8260 Lesley Griffiths, Darren Millar
To propose that the Senedd:
1. In accordance with Standing Order 16.5:
a) Establishes a Wales Covid-19 Inquiry Special Purpose Committee with the remit to:
i) Following the publication of the reports at each stage of the UK Covid-19 Inquiry and in the context of the UK Covid-19 Inquiry’s terms of reference and timetable, propose to the Senedd by motion, any gaps identified in the preparedness and response of the Welsh Government and other Welsh public bodies during the Covid-19 pandemic that should be subject to further examination.
ii) Subject to Senedd approval, undertake a review into those areas identified for further examination.
iii) Publish reports and make recommendations accordingly.
b) Agrees that the Special Purpose Committee will not revisit the conclusions of completed Senedd Committee inquiries and should seek to avoid duplication.
c) Agrees that the Special Purpose Committee will not be prohibited from investigating matters previously examined by Senedd Committees where there is updated information and a clear benefit of further scrutiny.
2. Calls on the Business Committee to ensure that the Special Purpose Committee’s reports will be debated in Plenary no later than two months after their publication.
3. Calls on the Business Committee, in proposing the membership of the Special Purpose Committee, to propose no fewer than six members, including the Chair.

Motion moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Formally move.

Rhun ap Iorwerth to speak.

Rhun ap Iorwerth AC: Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd. I and my Plaid Cymru colleagues have been consistent from the very earliest days of the COVID pandemic, three years ago, in arguing that we would need a Wales-specific COVID inquiry to investigate a wide range of issues about Wales's preparedness and response to that pandemic. To me and many others, not least the families of the COVID bereaved, that was absolutely necessary to seek the truth and learn lessons. Welsh Government chose not to allow such an inquiry, and chose for Wales to be covered only as part of that general UK inquiry that we now know is under way—an inquiry where the Welsh NHS isn't even on the list of those providing evidence. Now, the Scottish Government did rightfully and decisively act early, and established a Scottish inquiry. With the chair of the UK COVID inquiry admitting clearly herself that the inquiry she will lead cannot cover every issue relating to Wales, it begs the question as to why the Welsh Government did not follow Scotland's step.
Nonetheless, I welcome this first step towards the establishment of a special purpose committee to analyse the Welsh Government's response to the COVID pandemic, and in fact we co-proposed the original motion supporting this, not because it's enough, but because it is at least a means to seek some answers through identifying the most obvious gaps in the UK inquiry. Some of those areas we need answers about were identified in three reports by the Senedd Health, Social Care and Sport Committee in the fifth Senedd—a wide range of issues were covered by that committee, from personal protective equipment issues to what happened in our care homes here in Wales. We need to know what the gaps are now.
We will continue to closely monitor the design of the committee that is being set up to ensure that it does fully deliver on its stated aims, but I do have to comment on the manner in which this was announced. Surely a Senedd cross-party committee, which would command cross-party support and require cross-party co-operation, should have been developed on a cross-party basis, rather than in a Labour-Conservative deal. That, I fear, does not inspire confidence among the COVID bereaved, and many others, in the foundations on which this special purpose committee is being built. And here I would like to pay tribute to the tireless efforts of the COVID-19 Bereaved Families for Justice Cymru, who have led the arguments and led the case for a Welsh COVID inquiry. I hope that this special purpose committee, though not giving us what we want, ultimately, will at least provide them with some of the answers that they so richly deserve.
In closing, Llywydd, the Welsh Government was right to use the devolved levers at its disposal during the pandemic to strike a more cautious and a more caring path compared with the recklessness of a UK Government that, as it turns out, was more interested in partying than in following and heeding the advice of its own scientific advisers. But the legitimacy of exercising devolved powers is surely undermined if they are not subject to clear and robust scrutiny.

I have no other speakers. The Trefnydd to reply.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Diolch, Llywydd—

I do apologise; I do have one other speaker. Andrew R.T. Davies.

Andrew RT Davies AC: Thank you very much, Llywydd. I want to put on record that it is our clear intention that we continue to support the creation of an independent COVID inquiry here in Wales. That's something that I've always said and my benches have always voted for here in Wales. I don't speak for the First Minister—the First Minister's able to speak for himself—but I do take exception to the point that the health spokesperson and possibly leadership contender on the Plaid benches, who tried to instigate that this was some sort of grubby deal—. It was no deal. It flowed from the debate that the Conservatives led here before Christmas, which was an open invitation from the First Minister to have that discussion. In the discussions the First Minister and myself had, as I understand it, he had a discussion with the leader of Plaid Cymru, or the then leader of Plaid Cymru. I don't know what the response was from the then leader of Plaid Cymru to the engagement in the process of the formation of this committee, but it is regrettable that the health spokesperson for the Plaid Cymru group has tried to paint this as some sort of deal, when it merely seeks to put a measure in place—I'll take the intervention in a minute—seeks to put a measure in place. Because the Government benches have the vote to stop the independent inquiry, I have to accept that, as leader of the opposition in this place, but I want to see a form of Senedd parliamentary scrutiny that this special purpose committee will create. It is no grubby deal—it is an ability to get under the skin of the inquiry and the decisions that have been made, and I think this is a meaningful way of progressing those discussions to bring a fruitful conclusion to the debate.

Rhun ap Iorwerth AC: Just a very brief intervention, and I thank you for taking that intervention. Just to make the case, of course, that we worked together on making that submission to the Senedd to discuss a special purpose committee towards the end of last year. And my point is that co-operating on something that will be a cross-party special purpose committee would add to that belief that this is a transparent way forward to try to seek some answers.

Andrew RT Davies AC: I accept the point you make, but I reiterate the points that I made in my remarks that, as I understand it, there was a discussion with the Plaid Cymru group. I know I had a discussion with the leader of Plaid Cymru; I appreciate an informal discussion that was. But to try and paint the picture that two parties got together to create this and exclude everyone else is wrong.

Trefnydd.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Diolch, Llywydd. I would just reiterate what the leader of the opposition has said. Welsh Government worked with the opposition party, the Welsh Conservatives, in relation to the establishment of this special purpose committee. There's certainly no deal been made.
I appreciate what Rhun ap Iorwerth has said. He will also appreciate that health is not part of the co-operation agreement, for instance, so I don't think—. The implication certainly was that a grubby deal had been done. I think this is far too serious an issue to be portrayed in this way. The pandemic touched the lives of everyone in Wales but, of course, especially those families, many, many families, who lost a loved one, and it's right that the decisions taken by the Welsh Government and also by Welsh public bodies are openly and properly scrutinised, and we continue to believe that the best way to do that is through the UK COVID-19 inquiry. We continue to engage fully with the inquiry to ensure our actions and decisions are fully and properly scrutinised, and since last year I know we've provided a significant number of statements and documentation to allow the inquiry to carry out its very important work. As the UK COVID-19 inquiry moves through each—

Jane Dodds AS: Minister. Minister, sorry—

There's an intervention request.

Jane Dodds AS: Can I just—?

Lesley Griffiths AC: Can I just finish?

Jane Dodds AS: Yes, of course.

Lesley Griffiths AC: As the UK COVID inquiry does move through each of its modules, this special purpose committee will allow the Senedd to determine were there any gaps, for instance, in relation to Wales’s preparedness and response. I'll take the intervention.

Jane Dodds AS: Thank you for taking my very brief intervention. I concur with my colleague, Llyr—Rhun, sorry. Just to also highlight, we understand that the bereaved families were not aware of this proposal. Many of them were in contact with us to say that they weren't aware of the proposal from Labour and Conservatives for this special inquiry. I wonder if you could just clarify that and also how you intend to work with them in relation to the special committee. Thank you.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Thank you. Well, as you—

There's an attempt by Darren Millar to answer the question, I think. I think what he wants to do is intervene.

Darren Millar AC: I wanted to intervene on the Minister, if I'm allowed to, prior to her making a response.

It's up to the Minister whether she allows the intervention.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Fine.

Darren Millar AC: It's a matter of public record that we requested the establishment of this committee in a Senedd debate, and that there was an offer, then, from the First Minister, to meet with the leader of the opposition in order to take something forward. There's nothing hidden from the COVID bereaved families group that all of us in this Chamber have been engaging with on a regular basis, including the Welsh Conservative team.

Lesley Griffiths AC: So, I was going to say that, obviously, the debate that the leader of the opposition referred to in his intervention is a matter of public record. We believe, as a Government, that this special purpose committee will strike the right balance with the work that we're doing with the UK COVID-19 inquiry, and ensure that any matters that do merit additional scrutiny in Wales are fully examined, so that we can all learn the lessons of the pandemic. Diolch.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? There are no objections. Therefore, the motion to establish the committee has been agreed.

Motion agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

4. Statement by the Counsel General and Minister for the Constitution: Electoral Reform

Item 4 is next, a statement by the Counsel General and Minister for the Constitution on electoral reform. I call on the Counsel General to make his statement—Mick Antoniw.

Mick Antoniw AC: Thank you, Llywydd. I welcome this opportunity to expand on my written statement of 30 March, where I outlined the next steps on our journey to deliver this Government's commitment to reduce the democratic deficit in Wales and develop an electoral system fit for the twenty-first century. This is complementary but separate to the work on reforming the Senedd that we are progressing as part of our co-operation agreement with Plaid Cymru.
Last month, the Electoral Commission published its annual report on public attitudes. It showed that 66 per cent of people saw low turnout as a problem; it was the second greatest concern after media bias. Electoral fraud was raised by only 28 per cent of respondents, perhaps knowing that no-one was prosecuted for impersonation last year.
The elections in England two weeks ago show the result of different government priorities. Our approach in Wales seeks to enhance our democracy by involving as many people as possible. The UK Government raises barriers, claiming the fortunately low threat of electoral fraud.

Mick Antoniw AC: Our White Paper, published in October, described our ambition to enable every citizen to play their full part in our democracy and lay the foundations for future innovation and improvement. Today I want to set out the breadth of our improvements to date and the next steps of our reform journey.
We made funding available for local authorities to recruit an electoral registration support officer to improve electoral registration rates amongst newly enfranchised and hard-to-reach groups. This was a successful use of funding, and our data shows those who employed an officer recorded, on average, a fourfold increase in registration compared with authorities who did not. We know from the Electoral Commission's report on electoral registration in Great Britain in 2022, which was published in March, that registration rates in Wales improved at a greater rate between 2021 and 2022 compared to Scotland, England and Northern Ireland. This is great news, and I want to build on a momentum that has been created across Wales. Encouraging people to register and to subsequently vote is incredibly important to us, but so is making democratic processes as straightforward as possible for the elector.
At the moment, around 15 per cent of people eligible to beon the local government electoral register are not taking up their right to register to vote. We want every single eligible person to be on the register and to subsequently vote. To support this we plan to pilot the automatic registration of electors for the local government electoral register in Wales. This will mean that citizens won’t have to register to vote in either Senedd or local elections, and will be on the electoral roll to receive information about the forthcoming elections.

Paul Davies took the Chair.

Mick Antoniw AC: To do this, we are working with local authorities and key electoral stakeholders to develop an automatic registration pilot scheme. We are working together to establish the most effective and accurate way to register voters without application and to communicate with them about their registration, including the need to actively register for UK Parliament and police and crime commissioner elections. A key focus will be ensuring that vulnerable electors are safeguarded. The co-production of this pilot scheme will help us to modernise and simplify electoral registration in Wales and I look forward to seeing the results of the pilots in due course.
We have made £300,000 available in both this financial year and the next for our democratic engagement grant. This supports projects building on work that has already demonstrated impact, or with an innovative approach to overcoming barriers to participation in democracy. We received 25 proposals during the first application window, with 11 projects already approved. Some of the successful organisations that will be recipients of funding include, for example, the Politics Project, who will continue their digital dialogue sessions in schools across Wales, bringing students and elected members together to build understanding and air what matters most to them; British Deaf Association Cymru, who will deliver bespoke workshops across various deaf centres, deaf clubs and deaf groups across Wales to explain the meaning of democracy and how it works, to empower deaf people currently under-represented in our politics; and Llanelli Town Council, who will produce materials and run sessions in local schools focusing on good citizenship and how to engage in democracy and local government. Projects funded through the democratic engagement grant will go a long way to help those not active within the democratic process. This could help them to register to vote or encourage them to participate in democratically elected bodies, such as town and community councils.
Democratic institutions should also reflect the communities they serve, and we recognise the challenges faced by people in under-represented groups. We have already removed barriers to participation in council business by encouraging greater flexibility on the timing and format of council meetings and supporting job sharing within the executive of principal councils. With support from Disability Wales, we piloted the access to elected office fund to assist disabled people to stand at devolved elections. We intend to legislate to ensure that a fund is available for future elections.
To strengthen electoral administration we will build on existing good voluntary work to co-ordinate electoral administration through a new electoral management board. This will put the good relations between returning officers, electoral registration officers and other persons responsible for the administration of elections in Wales on a more solid footing.
The Local Government and Elections (Wales) Act 2021 gave principal councils in Wales the option to choose between first-past-the-post and single transferable vote systems for principal council elections. We recently consulted on draft rules for elections using the single transferable vote, to aid local authorities’ consideration of whether to use their new powers to change their voting system. They have until November next year to decide for the 2027 elections. We believe in local choice, and it’s for local authorities to determine which electoral system works best for their residents and communities.
We are also progressing this work in conjunction with also developing into legislation the special purpose committee’s proposals on Senedd reform, which were endorsed by the Senedd in June last year. Although these proposals will be addressed via separate legislation from the other measures I have outlined, the reforms will need to be implemented collectively.
In taking this work forward, I am mindful of concerns about the capacity of local authorities’ elections teams to adapt to the broad changes on the horizon. I very much value our constructive relationship with the electoral community and the work undertaken year round to support elections as the cornerstone of our democracy. We will continue to work closely with delivery partners as we continue to develop and work to implement our proposals for modernisation. There is much we still need to do, and we will, therefore, continue to work with stakeholders throughout this Senedd term as we progress our proposals and bring forward legislation in anticipation of the next major devolved elections in Wales in 2026 and 2027. Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd.

Darren Millar AC: Can I just thank the Minister for the advance copy of his statement today? I think everybody in this Chamber wants us to have a more vibrant democracy, in which more people are able to access their democratic right to vote and where voter turnout is increased, and we must all work together across the Chamber to be able to deliver that.
I do think it's a bit disappointing, though, that the Minister does want to dismiss the concerns of more than one in four people in Wales around voter fraud and use that to express his opposition to the UK Government's position, which is that we need to ensure that there is photographic identification when people go to vote. We know, as we've already rehearsed these arguments, that voter ID is the norm in most western democracies. People need to have photographic ID in order to obtain a bus pass, for goodness' sake, so why shouldn't it be an expectation for people when they go to vote? We know as well that there were 1,386 reported cases of election fraud between 2018 and 2022, and it was your own party that actually introduced the requirements for photographic ID in Northern Ireland.
But, those facts aside, I do want to welcome some of the steps that the Welsh Government is now taking to try and improve and increase the participation of people in the democratic process. You made reference to the fourfold increase in registration in those local authorities that had electoral registration officers designated, and I wonder whether you could tell us which local authorities do have those and which don't, and what the actual data is. If you could publish that information, I think it would be very helpful, so that we can hold feet to the fire in our own local authority areas, in the areas that we represent, to see whether they can do a better job.
Also, just in terms of the automatic registration, if I may, of people, obviously this is something that has been pursued in the past, most notably by Tony Blair's Government, I think, back in the early 2000s, and the project was abandoned, largely on the basis of cost, because of the need for a UK-wide population register. You haven't set out in your statement today precisely how you intend to achieve automatic voter registration and whether that would be in conjunction with discussions with UK Government agencies, for example, like driver vehicle licences, et cetera, or whether it would be something that could be done, perhaps, with local authorities engaging with people on their council tax and other sorts of charges.
It strikes me that, often, people who aren't registered to vote either simply don't want to exercise their right to vote and, therefore, don't bother registering or, indeed, simply forget because they're in the process of moving home or whatever it might be, and it happens to be an election year and then they drop out of the system. Now, the latter, of course, could be addressed by ensuring that people who are registered for council tax purposes are also registered to vote at the same time. But we mustn't make the assumption that everybody who is automatically enrolled is going to want to vote. In fact, studies in the United States, where automatic voter registration has been introduced, have actually demonstrated that far fewer people of those automatically enrolled actually turn out to vote than the general population at large. So, this could actually have a negative impact on voter turnout, although it could, actually, increase the numbers voting overall, and I think we have to go into that with our eyes wide open. So, perhaps if you could tell us what sort of activity you're likely to engage in on the auto-enrolment side of things, I'd appreciate that.
You mentioned the £300,000 in grants that has been available so far through the democratic engagement grant. I'm very pleased that you've gotten some projects off the ground, with 11 already approved. Can you publish a list of those, please—where they are and what they're actually doing? I think Members would like to know that; it would be good to see how it's operating. I'm aware of the Politics Project. I have written to local schoolsin my own area, encouraging them to take part in the digital dialogue sessions, and I think that some Members of my own group have taken part in those sessions, including Tom Giffard, who I think had rather a rough time with some of the questions that were posed in his session. But look, this is an excellent way to get people engaged in our local schools. Many of us, of course, are visiting schools anyway and participating in citizenship sorts of lessons, but I do think that anything we can do to help overcome any barriers between us and particularly young people, those who are less likely to turn out to vote, can be a positive thing.
Just if I may, as well, I don't want to take any liberties, but I've got a couple of final questions.

Paul Davies AC: Very quickly.

Darren Millar AC: In terms of diversity, the access to elected office fund, I don't know how successful that has been, but it strikes me that not many people are aware of it, and therefore, we're not getting many applications to draw down from it. So, I want to know what the Welsh Government is doing to promote that fund, so that we can actually encourage people to take it up.
With regard to STV, and the consultation that you've got on with local authorities, it would be good to know how many local authorities are exploring that option. I'm not aware of a single one in Wales, and I don't think there will be any that will volunteer to do that, but you never know; with the possible exception of Powys, we could be in for a change there.
And then—

Paul Davies AC: The Member must conclude now, please.

Darren Millar AC: Final question: in terms of stakeholders' concerns, obviously the biggest concern, particularly about auto-enrolment, is the challenge to people's identity and people being located if they're on an open register that is available in the public domain. Can you tell us what you're doing to mitigate against that concern? Thank you.

Mick Antoniw AC: Thank you for all those questions. I'll try and answer them all. I thank you also for the positive way on most of the points.
Perhaps I ought to at least start with the first point that you raised, which was, of course, the issue of a purported voter fraud and the issue of ID cards. You probably will have been surprised, as I was, to hear the admission by former Government Minister Rees-Mogg yesterday that—[Interruption.] [Laughter.] He never said that before. [Interruption.] Basically, they were surprised that it was a bit of a shot in their own foot for having introduced a system that was supposed to suppress voters, but it appears the voters that were suppressed they regarded as elderly and mainly Conservative voters, so it didn't work.
But the key thing for me is that I don't really care what it is, how someone is going to vote within this; it seems to me that the thing is that there were large numbers of people who were turned away from voting. Some returned, but many didn't. I did discuss this with the Electoral Commission yesterday, and this is an area that we do want to sort of analyse and understand precisely what happened, why and how.
I don't want to go through the whole debate on the ID cards, because we've discussed it many, many times; I'd like to go on to some of the really positive points that were raised. With regard to the local registration officers, while I think you're right that there clearly were the statistics, and the data does show that there were improvements in registration where they were, I can certainly publish that information in terms of the ones that didn't.FootnoteLink
In terms of auto-registration, it's still—. I mean, it's one of those areas we really need to explore very, very carefully. A lot of work is going on on it and access to some data will, of course, be required from things like the NHS registration data, maybe the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency, maybe councils, and there may be other bodies. So, it's basically ensuring that we've got a sound system in terms of being able to accommodate and bring in the maximum number of people that you actually can, in terms of the auto-registration. I share the view, I think, that's common across all parties: we all want to see as many people as possible registered and having the opportunity to vote.
The other point, of course, is that there is no compulsion to vote, and that is going to be the challenge, I think, for political parties and our communities as well, that once people are automatically registered, it's up to us to actually show that there is a difference in voting, that things can happen. I have to say that my own personal view is that one of the things that would actually improve people's belief that they can change things and that their vote matters would be the actual voting system, proportional representation, but that's a debate for another time. I think whatever happens with auto-registration, the key thing is going to be that there will be a challenge to us all to actually maximise those people's participation, because I think our democracy is at a cliff edge when so many people don't participate, and we have to, I think, see the warning signs that are there.
The digitisation, of course, of the electoral system offers many opportunities in respect of those with disabilities or difficulties in voting for one reason or another, and to look at the opportunities of how technology can be used, maybe in terms of different location voting or central location points, where the technology is there and so on. So, those are all things I specifically asked to be explored.
Certainly, we'll publish the list of the various projects. I only picked three of them, really, for an example today, but I'm happy to publish those as they continue.
In terms of diversity to elected office, I obviously want to explore more how that can be used, how it can be made a regular feature, and how we can maximise. So, there's obviously work in progress there.
With regard to single transferrable voting and local authorities, it's going to be completely a local decision; local authorities have that choice.
And on the final point you raise with regard to the register, we are looking at a closed register for obvious reasons. You've got people now much younger who'll be on that particular register. The access to the register will be to those who have a legal requirement, or a sound reason to actually have access to that. I hope I've answered all your questions.

Information further to Plenary

Peredur Owen Griffiths AS: Thank you to the Counsel General for the statement and for advance sight of the statement.

Peredur Owen Griffiths AS: Much like the national and UK level, electoral reform in local government is long overdue. Plaid Cymru has consistently emphasised the need to dispense with the first-past-the-post electoral system, and move towards a more proportional model, befitting of the needs of a mature, inclusive and well-functioning democracy. The inherent flaws of first-past-the-post have been apparent for some time. They include distorting the influence of larger parties, and effectively disenfranchising vast swathes of the electorate that do not vote for the winning parties at a constituency level. This also has the effect of creating safe seats, which engender electoral apathy, complacency on the part of the ruling party, and ultimately, low turnout. I might suggest that the fact that the Russian puppet state of Belarus is the only other country in Europe that exclusively uses first-past-the-post tells you all you need to know about its unsuitability.
At the national level here in Wales, we're pleased that, as part of the co-operation agreement, a more proportional electoral system will soon be introduced for Senedd elections, which will bring us in line with progressive democratic norms. However, in contrast to Scotland and Northern Ireland, local elections have persisted with first-past-the-post throughout the devolved era. In this respect, we welcome the recent initiatives by the Welsh Government to foster reform at local government level. As enshrined by the Local Government and Elections (Wales) Act 2021, local authorities in Wales now have the ability to move to a single transferrable vote in time for the 2027 local elections. Could I therefore ask what support and guidance is being provided by the Welsh Government to assist the local authorities that are considering switching to STV in time for the 2027 elections? When should we expect the publication of the final version of the relevant rules for local government?
I'd like to turn to another aspect of the Government's White Paper on electoral reform, namely the proposal to make automatic registration of voters mandatory for all electoral registration offices in Wales. I acknowledge the update on this point in your statement. At a time when the UK Government is imposing unnecessary burdens on voting rights in the form of new voter ID requirements, it is right that the Welsh Government should seek to ensure that participation in Welsh elections is as accessible as possible to the general public. It is especially important that, at local government level, where turnout for elections has historically been very, very low, the proposal in question would ensure that the Welsh electoral roll is updated in a timely manner, and that individuals are insulated from the risk of dropping off the electoral register unwittingly. This is a tendency that is especially apparent among young voters and qualifying foreign citizens in Wales. The White Paper mentions the Welsh Government's intention to work with local authorities to run pilots for automatic registration over the next few years. How far along are these schemes, and what feedback has the Welsh Government received form local authorities on relevant resourcing implications? Diolch yn fawr.

Mick Antoniw AC: I thank Peredur for those comments and his positive questions on that.
With regard to local government and proportional voting, as I say, what the Welsh Government has done is given the possibility to local authorities to actually make that particular choice. I do hope that we will see some of those choices exercised. Maybe Gwynedd will be the first, maybe it will be Powys, maybe it will be another local authority. But what we have done, in answering the other question you raised, is we have recently consulted on the draft rules for elections using the single transferrable vote, in order to aid local authorities to be able to consider whether to use the new power that they have to change that voting system.
Low turnouts are something of considerable concern. I've raised many times the issue of the democratic deficit, where 40 per cent of the population don't vote in Westminster elections, 50 per cent in Senedd elections, 60 per cent in council elections. I think that is a real challenge to democracy. Democracy in many ways is at a precipice when you reach those particular levels. As we talk about all the areas of well-being and health within our society, we have to start looking at the issue of our democratic health. And that's not only to our benefit but to the benefit of future generations as well.
In terms of electoral law itself, of course, we will have two pieces of important legislation that are reforming the electoral system. The historic legacy of different pieces of legislation relating to elections, which have been added on every few years, I think does make it ripe at some stage to look at the issue of consolidation of electoral law for Wales. I think we have to get these two pieces of legislation through first, but it then may well be ripe for that, as part of our overall consolidation operation.
I think the other thing to talk about is that what we are seeking to do—and I hope we have a spirit of agreement across this Chamber—is we're looking at the best way of actually modernising our electoral system, setting an example of what a twenty-first century electoral system should look like, and how it can maximise inclusivity, the use of technology, which is continually changing and advancing, year on year, to maximise input. I think the changes in technology will be something that present challenges to us and opportunities for us, year on year. What we want our legislation to do is to create a framework where we can maximise the benefit of that.

Rhianon Passmore AC: Counsel General, thank you for this important statement today. Democracy is a fragile flower that requires, from all democrats, constant vigilance, but also it requires good policy to enable participation. Minister, you stated earlier that the Electoral Commission in their annual report on public attitudes showed that 66 per cent of people see low turnout as a problem. Even at the very starting gate, 15 per cent of people eligible to be on the electoral register are not taking up their right to register to vote. There is a problem. And we're not talking about democratic engagement, education or political entitlement, we're simply talking about the most basic element of a democracy—an individual's right to vote, enfranchisement. We all here across this Chamber regularly commemorate and mark the sacrifice and huge efforts of previous and past generations to safeguard citizens' rights to vote, yet all around us, we see it slowly being eroded. So I greatly welcome today, Counsel General, the initiatives and proposals for Wales.
You will know, Minister, that we need to recommit here in this democratic place that the Welsh Government will prioritise getting all eligible Welsh citizens on the electoral register, and that we will continue to vocally and strategically oppose the anti-democratic approach adopted by the UK Government, where they have significantly increased barriers to voting, with the introduction of voter identification—and this is outside of Jacob Rees-Mogg's own shocking comments about gerrymandering. The limited impact assessment carried out by the UK Government itself demonstrates that women, young people and black, Asian and minority ethnic communities are now less likely to secure appropriate identification to vote. [Interruption.]

Paul Davies AC: Order, order. This is not a debate, this is a statement. And can I have a question, please?

Rhianon Passmore AC: I'm coming to that now.
For any Government to actively seek to place additional cost onto voters, to purchase ID during an economic crisis, is at best ill-advised and foolish, and at worst is purposeful disenfranchisement, and undemocratic. We must all strive to increase the number of people who are able to vote. Thank you.

Mick Antoniw AC: Thank you for those points. If I take that last one, again, the issue of ID cards is something we have debated, but I think it is very clear that a senior Cabinet Minister, who was in the Government at the time the decision was taken and the Bill was going through Parliament, has made it absolutely clear they saw it as a matter of voter suppression. The difference in attitude they have—. And this is the point we made; it was challenged in this Chamber. But I think we all took the view as to why it was being introduced in that way and why only certain forms of identification were available to more senior people but not to young people and so on. I would hope that in everything we do it should not be relevant how people are going to vote—the key is that they do vote, that they do participate. Then it's up to political parties and political movements to persuade people in terms of values and the sorts of changes that we actually want to see.
In terms of that 15 per cent not registered, it's 15 per cent too high. We have seen increasing levels of non-registration for a whole variety of reasons and we really do have to address that. But technology allows us to address that. What we also have to address though is the issues as to why some people don't vote. There are many reasons. One is that some think it doesn't make any difference, and we really do have to challenge and show that there are those differences. But it's also culture, isn't it? If you're a 16-year-old coming up to vote now, your parents haven't voted, your grandparents haven't voted, you have a culture of not voting. And I'm sure we have all seen on the doorstep, haven't we, those people who say, 'Well, no, I don't vote. It's not for me. I don't really understand what's going on.'
I think that brings us then on—. I can see the education Minister here, of course, and there is such a vital role for education. When I went to secondary school, at 14, children were still leaving. Then it was increased to 15, then 16, and then 18. What we now have is a whole generation of people who go all the way through school and leave at 18, and I think it raises the question of the adequacy of what we used to call 'political education'—let's call it civic education—education about our democratic systems, participation within that, which is a vital part of education. I'm glad that the curriculum is now seeking to address that, because this isn't a quick win, but it is something that over the years is one of the main ways of actually engaging with young people, engaging with who are going to be the future citizens and the future people who will be sitting, hopefully, in this Chamber.

Jane Dodds AS: I welcome the Minister's statement. Diolch yn fawr iawn. At a time when we see crude voter suppression at work in England, I wholeheartedly support your aim in increasing and broadening democratic participation here in Wales. Any voter turned away is one voter too many, and we must not tolerate that here in Wales.
I have three questions for you, if I may. One relates to the single transferable vote in local authorities. And can I just use this opportunity to say to anybody here in the Siambr, if you believe in STV, then, please, encourage your local authority to ensure that we have STV in local councils? It is absolutely vital that we see it at that level and we see it in the Senedd as well. So, please, Plaid Cymru-led, Labour-led—. And in Powys we have a Liberal Democrat-led council, who do want to look at STV at the local level. But my question to you, if I may, is about capacity. It's about capacity within local authorities in order to develop an STV process, particularly when there are other pressures within local authorities.
My second question is around democracy between our elections. It's about participation between those elections. And could you just comment on the Wales Centre for Public Policy's report, which includes measures like participatory budgeting and a citizens' assembly, and whether you will be pushing those forward as well?
My third and final question is on Senedd reform, which I support, as you know. Will you indicate clearly when we can expect detailed proposals and a draft Bill? Thank you. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Mick Antoniw AC: Firstly, in terms of the single transferable vote, I really do hope there will be examples. We've been through the process of changing legislation to enable that to happen. I think we've rightly made it a responsibility and an empowerment of local government, so not imposing something upon local authorities to do, but for them to have that choice to do it. As I've said, there has been considerable engagement with local authorities, engagement with the local registration officers. I met with quite a number of them yesterday, at an event with the Electoral Commission. There's been consultation with them, and, again, engagement over the draft rules for the way in which such elections can be handled. I think once that is completed it's really a matter that moves over to local authorities to make what I think is a political decision—not political in terms of a party political decision, because I hope that doesn't come into it, but as a system where it is seen that STVmay be an opportunity for a more representative outcome in terms of council elections. But that will be, again, a matter for local authorities. In terms of the capacity, of course there is support and the engagement—I think that is already there.
In terms of participation between elections, well, of course, we've seen things like citizen assemblies and so on being used by the independent commission, and so on, in order to engage and to identify opinions. We've seen it also in Senedd committees and the way in which they've worked with establishing groups and so on, and I think that has a valuable process in terms of helping to get people engaged, to get certain groups engaged, and to get input, although they are not the ultimate outcome of the democratic process, which is the election of places such as this.
And in terms of when, well, it's not for me to prejudge the First Minister's legislative statement, which will be made within June, but I think it's pretty clear, you can see, when you work back on elections, in terms of the Gould convention and how long things have to be ahead, that we are working at pace to prepare to enable us to do that. And I can give the assurances, of course, that we will bring forward legislation, but I think you'll have to wait until June to really read the small print.

Alun Davies AC: Thank you very much, acting Presiding Officer. Minister, I'm grateful to you for your statement this afternoon. You may remember, some months ago, the First Minister said that he was becoming more radical as he grew older. Well, I'm certainly becoming more impatient as I grow older, and I believe—[Interruption.] Well, I might not have much time—you never know. I believe that when we have the opportunity for change, we have to grab that change and deliver that change for the people we seek to represent. For me, I want to see this place as a Parliament for everyone in Wales, following on very much from what the leader of Plaid Cymru said at questions this afternoon.
But we have to ensure that our reforms are rooted in principle: principles that are important to people across Wales; principles of diversity; principles of participation; principles of fairness. So, I want to see you, Minister, introducing legislation that delivers on that. I want to see STV as the default system for elections throughout Wales at all elections. We want to see fairness hardwired into our systems. But, I also want to see a return to four-year terms, so that people hold us to account. We're not able to run away from the electorate, and I believe that, whilst Darren Millar will tempt you, Minister, with all sorts of temptations of the right, I'm also pretty sure that the Conservatives would support a return to four-year terms, as will Plaid Cymru and the Liberal Democrats. So, we will have at least one proposal here that has the support right across the whole of the Chamber, and I think that is also important.
But also, Minister, I want you to look at how we continue to expand participation. We're looking at the potential of electronic voting, for example, to ensure that people are able to exercise their democratic rights in a way that fits in with how we live our lives today. I quite like the stubby pencil and a piece of paper, but I recognise that my children think that voting is something that you do on the phone. So, let's look hard at how we can be radical, Minister, and when it comes to taking decisions, when it comes to writing legislation, let's make sure that that legislation is rooted in the radical politics of Wales and the history that the Chartists taught us, that democracy is the way that we can deliver change for everybody—even Darren Millar.

Mick Antoniw AC: I thank the Member for those comments. Just taking that last point, in terms of terms and so on, I suspect there are many in the UK Government at the moment who are saying, 'Oh, God, not another year to go', but we'll have to wait and see. Of course, the Chartists talked about annual elections, and I'm not quite sure we would want to go down that particular road at the time.
I think the other point is, of course, in terms of proportional representation and the system we have, well, ultimately, it will be up to the Senedd here to decide in terms of the legislation that is put before it, and we want the best system of representation that we can get through with a two-thirds majority. So, there will be, obviously, a proportional—I hope—representation system. The precise mechanics of that are going to be, probably, as we've seen, a slightly different system to STV, but nevertheless a proportional system.
In terms of opportunity for change, in terms of radicalism, I think what we are doing, both in terms of Senedd reform and in terms of the electoral reform, is groundbreaking. I think it is incredibly radical. I think it is also something that will be setting the scene for future electoral reform throughout the UK, because I would hope that automatic registration, when it's seen how successful it is, will be something that they'd want to adopt for UK parliamentary elections and police and crime commissioner elections. And I think that there is a great opportunity as well to bring in the electoral system closer to people. There shouldn't be hurdles; it should be as easy as possible to vote. But that also requires a cultural shift, and I think it requires an educational shift in, actually, the engagement with people on the importance of why voting actually makes a difference to people's lives. It does make a difference. We see that day in, day out, but there are far too many people who've been, I think, misled into the view that it doesn't make much difference. So, that is going to be the challenge for all of us as politicians, to actually put that across and to engage with people and with our communities to make that happen. Diolch.

Mike Hedges AC: There's a problem with turnout at elections at all levels. There is also a problem with voter registration. From my experience, people who do not register to vote mostly do not want to vote, and like many other people, I've gone around knocking on the doors of people who are not on the electoral register who have shown no interest in joining the electoral register whatsoever. We as politicians are failing to enthuse the electorate. We are failing to make them think that what we do is important to them. It's a challenge for us as much as it is a challenge for us doing things to make it easier.
On STV, the Irish election showed that it's certainly not a proportional system, where Sinn Féin won the most votes but not the most seats. It took 12,745 votes to elect each Fianna Fáil Member, but 14,476 to elect a Member of Sinn Féin. It exists for Scottish council elections, creating very large wards; one of them is roughly the same size as Trinidad and Tobago. The SNP have not brought it in for Scottish parliamentary elections, I think for fairly obvious reasons. But my question to you is: how many councils have expressed initial interest in moving to STV? Have you heard from Gwynedd, Carmarthenshire, Ynys Môn and Ceredigion whether they want to move to STV? And can I just say, PR creates more safe seats than anything else?

Mick Antoniw AC: Well, thank you for sharing those views and points and, of course, turnouts in elections and whether people want to vote or not vote—what we have to say is that 70 per cent used to be the baseline on general election voting, now it is a ceiling on voting, so we have to start asking ourselves: what is it that has actually changed that means that fewer and fewer people actually want to vote, want to participate? And I don't particularly disagree, there are many who are not on the register because they're not interested, they don't want to vote, they don’t want to even appear on a register. But I think, equally, there are many people who we need to engage with in order to encourage them to vote, to create this environment in which they will want to vote, and to ensure that, in the position when an election does take place, if they make that choice, they can vote. Also, by having automatic registrations, I think we really have to address the young 16-plus voters, in terms of those people who, we would hope, will vote at the age of 16 or when the nearest election is, and they will carry on that through their lives, and that becomes part of the education responsibility. There is data that shows that if you don't vote in those first couple of elections, you might never vote in your life. So, there are many, many challenges.
With regard to local authorities' interest, well there've been those consultations. I think it's up to the local authorities now to look at and to decide whether they want to participate or not. So, I think that is really an ongoing political process, and no doubt, local council will be considering this over the coming months, and we will then learn from them whether there are any expressions of interest, and it is up local authorities to make that choice.

Paul Davies AC: And finally, Jenny Rathbone.

Jenny Rathbone AC: Thank you. I've always supported 'no taxation without representation', and it was very disappointing to hear some of the Tory party down the other end of the M4 decrying the Labour proposal to allow the five million foreign citizens permanently residing in this country to be denied the vote, as well as 16-year-olds as well. So, we have to get over this anti-European xenophobia that seems to be so popular with some people. It is surprising that so few people, who are not on the register, know that you can do it on your phone, and it takes you all of two minutes. But I think the problem is much wider than that.
I very much welcome your pilot of automatic registration, because I recently met a woman who'd lived in her own home for over 30 years, but recently widowed and suffering from macular degeneration. I well understand why she simply did not realise that she was not registered, because reading anything would've been a struggle for her, living on her own. So, I think in those sort of circumstances, where there must've been a knowledge by the local authority that she still lived there, because she was still paying council tax, it would certainly be sensible to ensure that she was given her right to vote. But, I think we absolutely have to ensure that everybody is given every opportunity to engage in the political process, because it's extremely dangerous if we do not. We cannot confine our democracy to just voting once every four or five years; we have to be permanently discussing with people proposals that they are interested in and that chime with what they want, and that is one of the ways in which we can drive more people to think that voting is an important thing that they definitely ought to do as the very minimum of their responsibilities as a citizen.
So, it would be useful if you could update us on the numbers of local authorities that might be tempted to adopt STV. I think this would be a really good idea because people don't understand that, within multimember wards, they can choose whether they like X more than Y. But I also want to know—. I appreciate that you've had a big increase in uptake in those local authorities that have taken up the extra money you've offered to improve registration, and I just wondered if it's possible to publish which local authorities they are, so that we can double down on those that don't think this is an important matter.

Mick Antoniw AC: Thank you for your comments. On that last point, I think it has actually been published, but I can make sure that it's made available again.FootnoteLink In terms of the number of local authorities that might be tempted, well, I would hope that every local authority might be tempted. I think the temptation is there, the opportunity is there, the mechanism is there. Really, we all have inputs, we all have contacts within our local authorities, we all belong to political parties that are engaged within those local communities, and I'm sure those debates will take place, will start happening, and decisions will be being taken. So, we all have responsibilities ourselves along with others, but, ultimately, it is the decision of those councillors who have been elected and are accountable to their communities.
In terms of the pilot on auto-registration, in many ways, some of the pilots that we've introduced, like the flexible voting pilot and voting in different locations and so on, are, as much as anything, ways of showing how it can be done, how you can do the digitisation. No-one believes that there is going to be a sudden cultural change in the numbers of people turning out in those particular ways, but we need to show that the mechanics and the technology actually work, and I think that has been achieved. I was very grateful to the Electoral Commission for the evaluation that they have done on that.
And, of course, one of the things that we've been discussing and looking at is, of course, again, as I mentioned before, the opportunities in terms of accessibility. What I hope our legislation will do will also provide the mechanisms and the empowerment for the use of technology. It may well be that, by 2026, there are things that we want to do but we're not quite ready to do, but in future elections we need to do. I see no reason why you shouldn't have ballot boxes with a digital register in areas where loads and loads of people go. Why should it be difficult? Well, there are traditions, there are cultures in terms of voting, but we have to make sure that everything we do is robust, that it is democratic, that it is fair, that it has the integrity and support of people in the communities, and that is the basis on which the legislation is going to be constructed and brought forward. All the points you raised, and everyone has raised, in terms of the importance of maximising participation—I think we all recognise its importance for the future.

Information further to Plenary

Paul Davies AC: I thank the Counsel General.

5. Statement by the Minister for Education and the Welsh Language: Reducing Workload

Paul Davies AC: We'll move on now to item 5, a statement by the Minister for Education and the Welsh Language on reducing workload. I call on the Minister for Education and the Welsh Language, Jeremy Miles.

Jeremy Miles AC: Thank you, Llywydd dros dro. In my statement last September I was clear that tackling workload for school staff is a priority. I explained how a number of issues had been identified and considered by working collaboratively with education stakeholders through the established managing workload and reducing bureaucracy group.
This group has been effective at identifying how workload issues manifest within our learning environments, but there have been clear challenges in how solutions to these issues can be implemented consistently and practically across Wales. Through the social partnership arrangements that we have in place therefore, all stakeholders have agreed that the managing workload and reducing bureaucracy group will be reset before the start of the next academic year, with immediate discussions taking place to agree how we take forward work to ensure that tangible improvements are seen by education staff, including teaching assistants, at school level.
In my letter to employers and unions on 24 February I set out the parameters of these discussions and am confident this approach will determine the appropriate way forward to implement the measures that the group has already agreed appropriately. This includes an internal workload impact assessment process to ensure that, when new policies are developed by Welsh Government, the full impact on teacher workload is assessed before the policy is introduced. By having a robust workload assessment tool in place, workload impact will be at the forefront of all policy development.
The group will also review and agree a system for appropriate external engagement, as well as the roles and responsibilities of our education partners. There is further consideration needed of how we should develop school improvement arrangements, the workload impact of doing so, and how we can best support a self-improving system.
Another key aspect is the commitment to reducing the burden that schools face in terms of reporting. The reporting process needs to be clear and purposeful but it needs to avoid duplicating information across public bodies. The requirements of the school workforce annual census have been reviewed to ensure that only essential information is collected, including the addition of a supply cover category to standardise the way that schools collect this information.

Jeremy Miles AC: A new online booking system for supply cover will be introduced from September. The system aims to streamline the supply booking process, allowing schools to source supply cover directly, to view available staff in their areas and create their own talent pools.
Alongside reporting considerations, a separate group has been formed to discuss the expectations of Estyn and the inspection process, including ending the practice of mock inspections and, more generally, discouraging schools from over-preparation for inspections. We believe that neither is in the spirit of how to improve the inspection system, is not good use of practitioners’ or advisors’ time, and does not develop professional abilities or support well-being.
We have, of course, already ended key stage 2 and foundation phase assessments in line with the introduction of the new curriculum, and these have been replaced by teacher-based assessments to support progression. This was also intended to provide more time and space to support curriculum development within schools.
One of our commitments within our programme for government is to reduce bureaucracy to support school leaders. This is an overarching commitment and will not be delivered through one policy, but will be a consideration across all work being undertaken. There is additional work under way. In particular, we are continuing to implement recommendations from the review of school spending in Wales by Luke Sibieta. We've also reviewed our education grants and reduced reporting requirements to support our aim of reducing workload.
There are established work streams under way covering a range of other areas, including professional learning and performance management. Ensuring that school staff are able to effectively benefit from our professional learning offer is a key priority for me, and last monthI published guidance on how to use in-service training days and the professional learning grant to create time and space for practitioners to engage with professional learning. This includes advice on how best teaching assistants can engage with the offer, as professional learning is essential to ensure that they are able to effectively carry out their roles and support teaching and learning.
In relation to performance management, we'll develop revised guidance that'll bring arrangements in line with the wider changes to education policy. The revised guidance is due to be published ready for the start of the autumn term and my officials will work with schools and local authorities to implement the new arrangements, whilst ensuring, crucially, that bureaucracy is minimised.
Workload concerns have also been addressed as part of the plans to embed additional learning needs reforms. ALN co-ordinators, local authorities, headteachers and third sector providers have all said that more time is needed to embed effective change. I have listened to their concerns and on 20 March I announced an extension to the implementation period of the ALN Act from three to four years. I hope this will create more flexibility, help alleviate workload pressures and protect quality of provision to meet the needs of learners.
Alongside our focus on reducing workload, I have provided further funding to support well-being services for school staff in Wales. The well-being in Wales programme is now in its third year and provides support to the teaching profession through a bespoke range of services. The programme includes direct assistance for school staff through a school advisory service, a direct telephone support service, resilience training and a dedicated website with Welsh language-specific content. Anyone working within the education profession in Wales can access these services, including those with workload concerns.
Llywydd dros dro, managing workload and reducing bureaucracy, allowing school staff more time to focus on teaching, is in all our best interests. However, it is only achievable if we work collaboratively with stakeholders and identify practical solutions that provide the outcomes we need for the profession in Wales. I'll continue to ensure that the measures I've outlined today are progressed, reducing workload and bureaucracy for the teaching profession wherever possible.

Laura Anne Jones AC: Thank your for your statement, Minister, and I welcome the intentions of the statement and some of the actions that you've taken, although I am disappointed that it lacks the substance and solutions needed to really get a grip of this problem. We all want to see teacher workloads reduced and to see a happier workforce. It is clear that the primary cause of these excessive workloads for teachers, and the stress that comes with them, is the shortage of teaching staff in Wales. More teachers means less workload and, importantly, better quality provision of teaching for learners.
The Labour Party, supported by Plaid Cymru, plan on spending an estimated £100 million in five years expanding the Senedd with 36 new politicians in Cardiff Bay. If even just a proportion of this enormous sum of taxpayers' funds was used to bring people into the teaching profession, then much of the pressure on teachers right now could be alleviated. Even four years ago, it was reported that teacher workload had reached critical levels. The 'State of Technology in Education' report at the time found that 81 per cent of teachers believed workload contributed to high levels of stress in schools, a 20 per cent increase from the previous year. Since 2011, we've seen a 10 per cent drop in teacher numbers. Last year, you hit 50 per cent of your own target for mathematics teachers, and just 30 per cent for physics and chemistry.
Minister, this self-made state of staffing crisis isn't going away, and is having a knock-on effect on all areas of school. Even though you have the recruit, recover and raise standards programme, this just isn't enough. When are we going to see these gaps filled and the skills that we need in our schools?
Minister, secondly, it is concerning that we are still having to talk about this, with the national workload charter that ran from 2017 to 2021 already clearly failing. One of its objectives was to ensure a reasonable workload to achieve a healthy work-life balance. How can anyone in the profession trust this Government? It's just not increasing the numbers of teachers that would ease the workload in schools that we see. We've seen budgets slashed by this Government and now school leaders have had to make tough decisions and get rid of pivotal teaching assistants, who help ease the burden in the classrooms.
In a survey done by the National Association of Head Teachers Cymru, 11,000 respondents looked at the financial future of their schools. Of them, 73 per cent stated that reducing support staff hours would have to be done. This Government seems intent on giving with one hand and taking with the other. A lack of coherent, joined-up thinking leaves a lot to be desired and it's our teachers and young people who are paying the price. So, I find it ironic that you mention teaching assistants in your statement when schools just can't afford them, given the lack of funding to follow a multitude of directives by this Welsh Government. When can schools expect proper funding to follow the rhetoric from this Government? How are you working with local authorities to ensure that the funding for teaching assistants is there so we don't lose more than we already have?
Finally, Minister, as I've said before, stating concerns to you both in the committee and on the floor of this Senedd in relation to what's happening on the ground in our schools with the implementation of the new ALN reforms, every school that I've visited the length and breadth of Wales have, without exception, stated to me their concerns of not having sufficient moneys available to deliver the ALN support needed in our schools, both in primary and secondary. Children and young people just aren't getting the support that they need at the moment. School budgets are already stretched to the max, and whilst waiting extraordinarily long waits for statements for children to come back, teachers are having to stretch themselves to teach a full class of pupils as well as having to attend to the very specific needs of one, two or three, perhaps, children in that same class. I'm not sure if you've ever taught in a classroom, Minister, but that is an almost impossible situation that means all pupils will miss out somehow through no fault of that teacher. This is causing unnecessary stress on our teachers, affecting their own mental health and adding huge workload pressures. It's good to see that in the statement you've mentioned mental health, but I won't hold my breath on how good it will be, because, if it's anything like the student mental health support that you've delivered, it's a massive failing. Minister, when are we going to see schools finally get the desperately needed help that they need for ALN staff to cope with the rising demands of ALN, and thus reduce those workloads of teachers in our schools?

Jeremy Miles AC: I thank the Member for her questions. It's a somewhat quixotic approach to ask us to be funding schools from other commitments that have cross-party support in this Chamber in relation to expanding the size of the Chamber. I'll remind the Member that one of the principal purposes for that is to improve the capacity for scrutiny, which I'm sure we would all welcome in this Chamber.
I'm bound to say that, if she feels there's a contribution she can make to finding other sources of funding that the Welsh Government can deploy in support of schools, she can look no further than the other end of the M4, where her friends in Parliament are imposing incredible constrictions on public spending right across the UK. What we have done in Wales is to prioritise education and other public services within the constraints of the budget that we face. The funding settlement we had from the Chancellor only a matter of weeks ago went nowhere towards meeting the impact on our budgets here in Wales of cost-of-living pressures and inflation.
She is right to say that schools are facing very, very difficult budgets. I started my day today talking to a head about some of the difficult choices they would need to make. Local authority budgets are also under pressure, as, indeed, are ours. The solution to that, I'm afraid, is the election of a Labour Government in Westminster, committed as we are here in Wales to investing in public services—[Interruption.]I think she might more profitably spend her time advocating for that in Westminster.
Subject to that caveat, the points that she makes in relation to recruitment pressures are sometimes very real, as I acknowledged previously. She will know from our many discussions in this Chamber what plans this Government has to increase recruitment, and she will also know that the recruitment levels are actually stable. That's what the data tells us in Wales. I understand the point that she's making, it has a political attraction for her, but the data tells us a slightly different story, and I think it's imperative that we do look at that evidence.
She talks about budgets being slashed. That is not the case. As she will know, we've increased the budgets for pupil development grant, we've continued the funding that goes direct to schools to be used flexibly to continue dealing with the impact of COVID pressures, and she will know from her apparently many visits to schools that most heads find the flexibility of that funding very attractive indeed. So, we're very happy to be able to continue providing that funding.
In relation to ALN reforms, she'll remember from the discussion that we had in committee—she will recall, I think, what we discussed then—that we've invested significant further moneys into the reform programme. It's—[Interruption.] I'm sorry, I can't quite hear the Member. I don't know if she wants to intervene on me, but—

Paul Davies AC: No, no. This is a statement. Please, I want to hear what the Minister's got to say. Minister.

Jeremy Miles AC: Thank you, Llywydd dros dro. So, for this year, we’ve invested a further £12 million and, indeed, £10 million of that’s gone directly to schools in order for them to be able to increase capacity for introducing what are very complex reforms. And she will also know that in responding to the points that the profession have made directly to us about the need for a little bit of extra flexibility, in particular to manage workload pressures, we’ve increased the transition period from three to four years, which is having an effect in schools and enabling people to deploy their resources more flexibly, in a way that I hope they find helpful.
The point she makes about mental health, I’m afraid, is not borne out by reality. She will, I think, know from the very important work the committee of which she is a member has recently done about the Government’s commitment to a whole-school approach to mental health and well-being. That’s focused on pupils but also learners, and I reminded her in my statement of the additional support we’re providing, through education support, now able to reach many, many more schools, which helps with the particular pressures that some staff may feel in terms of mental health and well-being, and I’m sure she’d welcome that.

Heledd Fychan AS: Thank you, Minister, for the statement today, and clearly Plaid Cymru welcomes all the Welsh Government’s efforts to try and improve the working conditions of teachers, and certainly in terms of reducing workload. This is a problem; it’s not unique to Wales, either. We have seen complaints in other parts of the UK and beyond in terms of the challenges facing the education workforce. And certainly, as a school governor over many years, my admiration for teachers is great; they do incredible work. And we do know that there has been huge pressure on them for years and that’s been acknowledged by you, Minister, by us as spokespeople, and certainly as one who tried to home-educate during COVID, one’s admiration for teachers has grown even more in seeing what a skill that is, because it is a skill to teach; it’s not something that anyone can do. And we also all know of those teachers who make a real difference to the lives of children and young people every day here in Wales.
But there is a problem, and you acknowledge that in this, in that we all know what the impact of too great a workload is. You recognise that in the statement, but what you refer to is that we don’t perhaps know how to resolve these challenges. And can I ask, therefore—because I wasn’t quite sure from the statement; you started with that point, said it was challenging and then finished with something else—were there some proposals put forward by the unions that couldn’t be taken further, and so on? I just wanted to understand that, because clearly, if there are challenges or things that you want to look at in more detail that haven’t been mentioned, it would be interesting to know that.
Clearly, there is a link between recruitment and workload very often in visiting schools and hearing from teachers that they can’t recruit staff to cover lunch times, for example, and the teachers have to do that, or that there may be challenges during the summer holidays with some of the programmes to open schools up, or perhaps attendance at school, and that that sometimes falls on teachers to be dealing with that because of these recruitment issues. So, certainly, I think this corresponds with previous statements that you’ve made in terms of how we make the education workforce more attractive to more people. It’s not just a solution in terms of reducing workload, is it?
But if I could ask specifically, therefore, in looking at the recruitment and retention of teachers, how important do you think it is that we do get that solution right in terms of workload specifically? You’ve also referred to supply teachers, which is something that we’ve been working on, and the new system to be introduced in September. So, how much communication will there be with schools on that to ensure that they understand the new system, which will hopefully save time and make it easier to recruit?
There are a number of solutions that you have outlined, but certainly, in terms of additional learning needs, I think there’s been a warm welcome to the provision of that additional year, but in terms of ensuring that we have the appropriate staff in place there, I think you have previously acknowledged that there are recruitment issues there. So, do you see this as a holistic approach, rather than it being siloed? Clearly, you’ve outlined the important work happening in terms of education stakeholders with the different groups looking at different aspects, but I assume that this all dovetails with the recruitment work too. I just want assurance on that. Thank you, Minister.

Jeremy Miles AC: Thank you, Heledd Fychan, for those important questions. Could I echo what she said at the outset in terms of how grateful we are to our teachers and teaching assistants for the work that they do? It's very important that we celebrate the work that they do. It's an opportunity for a person to go into a profession that can have an impact on the course of hundreds of lives, and perhaps thousands of lives, and that's unique, I think, so it's important that we do celebrate that as we look at some of the challenges facing us in the system as well.
In terms of the first question, what we have been able to find solutions in respect of, just to explain that. When the group was established, an effort was made to look at practical elements that could make a difference, and there were three or four things that the group decided on early on, in terms of the fact that they could make a difference. They have done that. After the COVID period, the group found maybe 15 short and medium-term things that were challenges that could be tackled, and it has been perhaps more challenging, practically, to obtain solutions to those. But that work has been important, because in the context of the negotiations that we've had with the teaching unions and with local councils over recent weeks, that work has been the basis for those discussions and has allowed us to move more quickly to look at elements of that, given that so much discussion has happened on some of those practical elements. So, I'm hopeful. I think that the work that we have done is important, and now it's helping us to resolve some of the challenges that have been discussed in the negotiations, so that's very positive.
You asked a question about whether workload is related to recruitment. Well, that's certainly possibly true. Being a teacher or a teaching assistant means that you have a significant workload. We can't avoid that. But the task for us is ensuring that we look from time to time at the holistic picture, to see whether we still need some of the things that have been put in place, for good reasons, over the years, but there has been reform in the system, so we have to look at whether that reform offers us opportunities to do things in different ways, and take away some of those elements of the old system, if you like. I gave some examples of that in my opening remarks. So, that's an important part of it too.
You mentioned additional learning needs. Specific work is happening to look at the responsibilities of the ALNCOs, and I'm expecting to hear by the end of this year, by December, what the output of that process is. I hope that we'll have some advice on how we can tackle that. But a lot of good practical work is happening, as I said in my statement, and I'm looking forward to providing a further update to Members in due course.

Paul Davies AC: And finally, Rhianon Passmore.

Rhianon Passmore AC: Diolch. Minister, I welcome your statement today, and the mitigations and initiatives articulated, and your recognition of the extreme commitment and passion of schools across Wales. This year alone I have witnessed and wish to acknowledge here the truly fantastic work being carried out in Islwyn schools, such as Fleur de Lys, Pengam, Blackwood, Markham and Bryn primaries and Islwyn and Newbridge high schools, from their Estyn inspections, visits to Islwyn schools, or meeting them here in the Senedd.
Teachers consistently strive and highlight to me the impacts and issues of excessive workload, the stress of increasing mandates and roles and managing inspections, and, increasingly, retention and recruitment. I know, Minister, that you're a strong advocate for ensuring that teachers spend more time teaching, and thereby spend more one-on-one time with our children, and this statement will be welcomed.
We are all aware of the tragic circumstances of the death of Ruth Perry, following an Ofsted inspection, as I've highlighted in this place previously, and of course Estyn's future role. This extreme event, though, is a tragic reminder to us all of the very important balance that needs to be maintained when we consider those real pressures that school communities are under collectively.
Minister, how will the Welsh Government then continue to ensure that the voice of the classroom practitioner and school governors—the largest cohort of volunteers in Wales—is able to be fully heard as reforms and new measures are introduced and strategically embedded across Wales?

Jeremy Miles AC: I thank Rhianon Passmore for that question, and she's right to say that we need to look at all the participants in our education landscape, if you like, to see whether the balance of expectation is in the right place, and we've been engaging, as I mentioned earlier, with Estyn in relation to that. There are certainly areas around mock inspections and the very intense preparation for inspections that, frankly, are not consistent with our new approach to the curriculum. So, there are some obvious ways in which we could ameliorate some of those pressures that, you know, have been introduced for good and understandable reasons, but for a regime that is no longer in place. So, there are some practical things. And, as she says, it's so important, isn't it, to listen to the experience of people and to hear what they are saying to us. Obviously, there are some things we can address. There are other things that we can't. But it's really important that we listen and, I think, the proposals that we are taking into those discussions are very, very much shaped and influenced by what we've heard from practitioners over the last few weeks in the course of those negotiations.

Paul Davies AC: Thank you, Minister.

6. Statement by the Deputy Minister for Social Services: National Care Service—Expert Group Report Implementation Plan (Stage 1) Publication

Paul Davies AC: Item 6, namely the statement by the Deputy Minister of Social Services, has been postponed.

7. The Education Workforce Council (Additional Categories of Registration) (Wales) Order 2023

Paul Davies AC: Therefore, we move on to item 7, which is the Education Workforce Council (Additional Categories of Registration) (Wales) Order 2023, and, once again, I call on the Minister for Education and Welsh Language to move the motion. Jeremy Miles.

Motion NDM8263 Lesley Griffiths
To propose that the Senedd, in accordance with Standing Order 27.5:
1. Approves that the draft The Education Workforce Council (Additional Categories of Registration) (Wales) Order 2023 is made in accordance with the draft laid in the Table Office on 25 April 2023.

Motion moved.

Jeremy Miles AC: Thank you, Llywydd dros dro. I move the motion to approve the Education Workforce Council (Additional Categories of Registration) (Wales) Order 2023. The main focus of the Order is to amend the categories for education practitioners who need to register with the Education Workforce Council. In Wales, we want everyone to enjoy an education that is safe and positive in order to ensure that learners achieve their potential. Registering with the council means that the public can be assured that the people working in education in Wales are appropriate to do that. Those registered show a commitment to maintain and improve standards for the benefit of the children and young people who look up to them. Registration also provides a route for individuals or organisations to raise concerns, and for those concerns to be looked into independently.

Jeremy Miles AC: In March 2022 and again in November 2022, we consulted on how we would update and strengthen the current regulation requirements of those working with our children and young people. With broad support for the proposals and the draft legislation, this Order will now positively reinforce the professionalism of the education workforce. This Order will ensure more practitioners have the confidence of the public because they can demonstrate they have the skills, knowledge and character to safely and effectively carry out the duties required of their profession. Teaching and learning staff in mainstream and independent schools, independent special post-16 institutions, and youth work settings will now have parity with their peers. This is an important step in supporting the work to review the current arrangements for regulating independent schools in Wales, and in carrying out recommendations put forward by the Children's Commissioner for Wales and the interim youth work board. I therefore ask Members to approve the Order today.

Paul Davies AC: I call on the Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, Huw Irranca-Davies.

Huw Irranca-Davies AC: Thank you. We considered this Order on 9 May, and our report was laid to inform Members in this afternoon's debate. The Government's response to our report is also available to Members.

Huw Irranca-Davies AC: Our report on the Order contained two technical points and two merits points, all of which required a response from Welsh Government, and I take the opportunity to thank the Minister for the response, which we were able to consider at our meeting yesterday afternoon.
The first technical point we have relates to Part 6 of the Order, which amends Schedule 2 to the Education (Wales) Act 2014 by adding four new categories of registered persons. Article 2 of the Order, which deals with the interpretation of the Order, includes the meaning of only two of the new categories, so we were unclear as to why this was the case. Now, in response, we have been told that the Welsh Government agrees with the point we've made, but doesn't consider that a reader would be misled.
The second technical reporting point in our report notes two issues with the way the Order updates the list in Schedule 1 to the 2016 Order of the approved youth worker qualifications. Firstly, this Order includes two qualifications already in the list, and secondly, an inconsistent approach has been taken to updating the list, in our view. The Welsh Government response to this reporting point agrees with us that there is unnecessary duplication and that the issue will be corrected when the Order is next amended. On the latter point, while agreeing with us, the Welsh Government does not consider, again, that the reader will be misled in any way by the inconsistent drafting approach and is not currently proposing to make any further amendments to the 2016 Order on this particular point.
On the merits points, the first merits point in our report notes our view that the title of the Order doesn't sufficiently reflect its content. In simple terms, the Welsh Government doesn't agree with us, and it is satisfied that the title gives a sufficient description of the nature of the statutory instrument. It's a point of disagreement, but that's fine.
Finally, our second merits point notes our concern that it is possible that not all the necessary amendments have been made via article 11 of the Order to Schedule 2 of the 2014 Act to remove the references from 'providing' services to 'supporting' the provision of services. The Welsh Government's response indicates that, while amendments have not been missed, it accepts that
'adopting a different form of words to express the same concept is not best practice.'
We have also been told that the Welsh Government does not consider this requires correction right now but will indeed consider this further when amending the instrument in the future. Diolch yn fawr iawn. Thank you to the Minister for your response.

Heledd Fychan AS: Clearly, we will be supporting the Order because it is crucial, as you've outlined. Looking after our children and young people is the most important consideration in all of this. I did want to ask a question on the fees particularly in terms of learning support workers in schools. As you will be aware, many people undertake this role on a part-time basis; they don't have the same pay and conditions as qualified teachers. Now, I assume in terms of the £15 fee—we've heard from some people in this category that it's difficult with recruitment in competing with jobs in supermarkets, for example; there are a number of challenges that they face. Is it the intention that the individual pays this fee, or will there be support available if people in this category have difficulty in finding the money to register?

The Llywydd took the Chair.

The Minister to reply.

Jeremy Miles AC: Thank you, Llywydd.I thank Huw Irranca-Davies for his contribution, and I thank the committee for their detailed scrutiny on the motion. And I thank him for describing the discussions between us in a way that reflected that, and I hope that Members will be content to support the motion following what the Chair of the committee has said.
Fees were one of the things that did arise during the consultation. We will be writing further, to explain what we intend to do in terms of fees, to the Member, but I do take the point that she made generally. It's important that we do ensure that these things aren't barriers to people joining the profession, but I thank the Member for her support for the motion that we're making otherwise.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? No. That motion is therefore agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Motion agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Items 8 and 9 are next. In accordance with Standing Order 12.24, unless a Member objects, the two motions will be taken together, the 2023 regulations on the Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016.

8. & 9. The Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016 (Consequential Amendments) Regulations 2023 and The Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016 (Amendment of Schedule 12 and Consequential Amendment) Regulations 2023

I will call on the Minister to move the motion, as there is no objection. The Minister for Climate Change, Julie James.

Motion NDM8262 Lesley Griffiths
To propose that the Senedd, in accordance with Standing Order 27.5:
1. Approves that the draft The Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016 (Consequential Amendments) Regulations 2023 are made in accordance with the draft laid in the Table Office on 3 April 2023.

Motion NDM8261 Lesley Griffiths
To propose that the Senedd, in accordance with Standing Order 27.5:
1. Approves that the draft The Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016 (Amendment of Schedule 12 and Consequential Amendment) Regulations 2023 are made in accordance with the draft laid in the Table Office on 25 April 2023.

Motions moved.

Julie James AC: Diolch, Llywydd. The Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016 (Consequential Amendments) Regulations 2023 make necessary changes to the Rent Act 1977 in order to ensure housing law is coherent, following the coming into force of the Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016. Unfortunately, these amendments were not included in the Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016 (Consequential Amendments) Regulations 2022, which made consequential amendments to 34 other pieces of primary legislation. The regulations provide for a succession to a secure contract under the 2016 Act where previously it would have been to an assured tenancy under the Housing Act 1988. Such successions are possible, for example where a Rent Act statutory tenant dies but a family member lives in the property. A secure contract provides similar security of tenure to an assured tenancy, and so is the most appropriate type of contract. Related consequential amendments are also included in the regulations. I am grateful to the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee for reporting on these regulations, and I ask Members to approve them.
The second set of regulations being debated today are the Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016 (Amendment of Schedule 12 and Consequential Amendment) Regulations 2023. The regulations amend Schedule 12 to the 2016 Act to provide clarity in relation to the landlord's obligations to ensure a written statement for any substitute contract. In addition, clarity is also provided around the issuing of written statements where a change of contract holder has taken place under a converted contract before 1 June 2023. This reflects our long-standing policy that contract holders should always have a written statement of their contract. This will mean that where a substitute contract arises before 1 June 2023, a landlord will be required to provide a written statement by 14 June 2023. The same 14 June deadline to provide a written statement will also apply where a change in the contract holder has occurred in relation to a converted contract before 1 June 2023. In order to achieve the clarity being sought, some further minor technical changes to Schedule 12 are also required. Again, I'm grateful to the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee for reporting on these regulations. We have responded formally to the technical and merits scrutiny points that needed a response. The committee raised some additional minor points that did not require a formal response and we have made some minor amendments to the regulations to address some of these. The effective meaning of the legislation remains unchanged, and I'd therefore ask Members to approve those regulations. Diolch.

The Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, Huw Irranca-Davies.

Huw Irranca-Davies AC: Thank you, Llywydd, and the Minister as well. We considered these regulations on 9 May and our reports are available from today’s agenda to inform Members in this afternoon’s debate.

Huw Irranca-Davies AC: I will speak very briefly on the first of the regulations, which I will refer to as the consequential amendments regulations. Our report on the consequential amendments regs contains just one merits point, which highlights a letter we received from the Minister on 3 April 2023 informing the committee that consequential amendments to the Rent Act 1977 were not included in the Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016 (Consequential Amendments) Regulations 2022, which were made on 9 November and came into force on 1 December. So, those missed consequential amendments left the statue book in something of an uncertain position, and the Welsh Government was concerned about significant consequences for both tenants and landlords, and we understand that.
My committee’s report on the second instrument, which I will refer to as the amendment of Schedule 12 regulations, is more substantial, and we have reported one technical matter and two merits points. The technical reporting point in our report on the amendment of Schedule 12 regulations highlights what we saw as an inconsistency in the way that the Welsh language term for 'identity' has been used in the regulations and in the 2016 Act that they amend. We thank the Minister for the response to our report, which we were able to consider at our meeting yesterday afternoon. We note that you consider that the necessary legal effect has been achieved and, in your view, there is no ambiguity in the meaning.
The first merits point in our report on the amendment of Schedule 12 regulations again refers to the letter we received from the Minister on 3 April. We have simply noted that the Minister drew to our attention the timescales for making both of these instruments we are considering this afternoon.
In the second merits point in our report on the amendment of Schedule 12 regulations we have noted that no formal consultation has been undertaken
'Due to the technical nature of the SI'.
But it was not clear to us whether the Welsh Government has made the relevant people aware that the changes are being made via these regulations, given that the Minister accepts, as set out in the explanatory memorandum, that the current position in Schedule 12 to the 2016 Act is unclear. In response, we have been told that the Welsh Government has provided a link to the draft regulations and explanatory memorandum to the landlord and the letting agency representatives, including the National Residential Landlords Association, Propertymark and Rent Smart Wales. Further, subject to the regulations being agreed by this Senedd, Rent Smart Wales have agreed to issue an update directly to landlords, and the Welsh Government will update the relevant renting homes guidance on its website. So, that's very good to hear. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Janet Finch-Saunders AC: It's at this point I have to say—and I don't say this easily, really—that we will be voting against, more so on the second point on these. And I've got to be honest, Minister, when you do bring forwardany new consequential amendments that seek to improve or, indeed, correct any misnomers in, say, the Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016, it would be a move that we would vote in favour of, but we cannot support these particular ones. I'll tell you for why, and it's a point that Huw Irranca-Davies has just mentioned. Everyone knows what date we are on today. This all has to be done and dusted by 31 May, and I can tell you now—. I declare an interest, by the way, as a property owner, not as a private landlord or anything. However, the lack of clarity, explanation and guidance that accompanies these changes has caused a great deal of despair to private landlords and representative bodies.

Janet Finch-Saunders AC: Mention has been made about consultation with stakeholders. Even if this is passed today, you are giving very little time for this to be implemented in a way that brings landlords along in line with all of these processes. The documents on your own Welsh Government website only help those new contracts started in December, and, realistically, anybody relying on using your own prepared documentation for ease could easily see themselves on the wrong side of the law if challenged. There is not enough clear information available for private landlords for them to understand the difference between a new contract and a converted contract.
Everybody has been of the opinion that if you renewed a contract, the requirement to provide the written statement was addressed. However, there is now a massive panic. As you will know, for landlords with longer term tenants, or contract holders as they will be known going forward, any converted contracts, as opposed to a new contract, have to reflect many of the original clauses. So, putting it in layman's terms, if you've had a tenant with you for, say, eight years prior to the stuff coming in in December, and you have given them a converted contract, or a new contract, in December, you have got to actually go through it line by line and make sure that your new one, going forward, actually addresses all of the terms, and you've got to make it abundantly clear that you have tried to do this; in other words, comparing every line with the original terms and including them in the new conversion. It's really, really complicated, this.
But, anyway, many of the new clauses in the model agreement are not particularly clear. For those of us doing what we do, and maybe those in the sector at representation level—. Even they're struggling, so goodness knows how, if you have an elderly landlord or somebody who, in the past, has maybe not been too familiar with the fundamental meaning of assured shorthold tenancies—.
In addition, some of the fundamental and supplementary provisions are different if you have a converted contract, meaning that the model agreements aren't entirely accurate. So, this leaves a very grey area, Minister. And because there's no case law, I can just see this heading to the courts for many landlords, I'm afraid, and tenants. So, in effect, all of those who thought, in 2022, 'We're going to do exactly what the Welsh Government have asked us to do; we're going to actually put these new contracts out in December', will now need to issue another contract. How can that be fair when—? I don't even know the date today. Hang on, what date is it? That's it, we've 16 days—15, really—to get this sorted. It isn't long enough.
So, Minister, I have a plea from the sector. And even though I'm not a private landlord, I have joined, recently, the Welsh Landlords Facebook group, who are a number of landlords expressing their concerns about this today. Minister, my plea is: would you consider extending the date that you expect all of this to happen from 31 May to the appropriate date in November? That will have given them 12 months to get their heads around that. I make that plea on behalf of them in the sector, but also the landlords. Work with your landlords. The last thing you as a Welsh Labour Government can afford, and we as elected Members can afford, is more private landlords leaving the sector at a time when you're not building houses. We cannot stand by and see more people going into hotels, bed and breakfasts, for temporary accommodation—[Interruption.] I can't make it any clearer than I have done today, Minister, and I'm asking you to work with the sector. We will work with you, if these are seen to be more fair-handed, reasonable measures, in taking these forward. Thank you. Diolch.

Mabon ap Gwynfor AS: Thank you to the Minister for bringing these regulations forward today. I'm going to declare an interest at the outset, which is on the public record. My comments relate to the two sets of regulations, and we will be supporting them, but some points and questions do remain.
The failure here to bring amendments before the Senedd seven years after the Act was passed and almost 10 years since it started its journey reflects poorly on the Government. There is a very real possibility that this failing has directly impacted tenants and landlords in Wales, with tenants particularly not getting the benefits expected from the original Act, and that's seven years after it was passed. I'd like to understand better, then, why we got to this point today.At best, this situation suggests that there is a grave lack of capacity within the department to deliver the work accurately and on time. I wonder if the Minister could explain to us how we've got to this point, where it takes seven years to correct a piece of deficient legislation. Further to this, does the Minister agree that the original legislation was pushed through the Senedd without sufficient scrutiny?
The situation with renters in Wales is troubled enough as it stands, and has got worse in recent years. The accurate legislation has saved renters from some of these problems, so the fact that it's taken so long has led to some suffering more than they should have done. I wonder if we can get an apology for them from the Minister for those failings to those people who have suffered as a result of the legislation not being corrected in due time. More than this, there's been a real lost opportunity in presenting an amendment that would make a real difference to tenants in Wales, which is no-fault evictions. The ability of landlords to throw tenants out does create real difficulties for tenants in Wales. We should have taken this opportunity to abolish this and give tenants assurance that they can live in their homes without the constant threat hanging over them. So, in light of the fact that people continue to be evicted in no-fault evictions and that there is recognition that this legislation is failing, will the Minister bring new regulations forward in the future to scrap the ability of landlords to undertake no-fault evictions? Thank you very much.

The Minister for Climate Change to respond to the debate.

Julie James AC: Diolch, Llywydd. Well, it's been an interesting set of remarks, not very many of which were directed towards these particular sets of regulations. I will try and do my best to clarify. I think, Janet Finch-Saunders, if you actually listened to what I was reading out, you would have a lot more chance of understanding it. I'll just read it again:
'This will mean that where a substitute contract arises before 1 June 2023, a landlord will be required to provide a written statement by 14 June 2023.'
I don't know how to make that any clearer: it's not 31 May. It's another 14 days, and it will arise in only very limited circumstances, as I said. You will not have to reissue a written statement where there's been no change in the contract holder, and a substitute contract has not arisen. So, it's pretty straightforward. Everything else you were talking about is as a result of the operation of the renting homes Act, which has already passed through this Senedd. So, I hope that's clear to you. It's as clear as we can make it. As the Chair of the committee said, we have communicated with all of the landlords' organisations and all of the tenants' organisations, and direct mailings are available, and also, we have the information on our website.
In terms of Mabon—there certainly will be a lessons-learned operation after the renting homes Act. I absolutely agree with you that taking that long to implement a very important piece of legislation is something that we need to avoid in the future. We absolutely will learn those lessons, and I and very determined to do. However, in terms of what is in front of us, we need to pass these regulations in order to correct a minor problem with the regulations, and I want, Llywydd, very much to correct that problem. It does not affect very many people, but for those it does affect, it's very important, and it will allow them to succeed properly into their contract and to be provided with the right written information to understand their rights. And on that basis, I propose that the Senedd agrees the regulations. Diolch.

The proposal is to agree the motion under item 8. Does any Member object? [Objection.]There are objections. We will therefore defer voting until voting time.

Voting deferred until voting time.

We'll now move to the next proposal; the proposal is to agree the motion under item 9. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. We will defer the vote until voting time.

Voting deferred until voting time.

10. Voting Time

That brings us to voting time, and, unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, I will proceed directly to voting. The first vote is on the Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016 (Consequential Amendments) Regulations 2023. And I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Lesley Griffiths. Open the vote. In favour 35, no abstentions and 14 against. And therefore the motion is agreed.

Item 8. The Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016 (Consequential Amendments) Regulations 2023: For: 35, Against: 14, Abstain: 0
Motion has been agreedClick to see vote results

The next vote is on item 8—. No. I apologise; it's on item 9.

I'm deliberately talking very slowly here, so that, if Members are joining, they can join up to their vote.

Right. So, I call for a vote on the motion under item 9, the Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016 (Amendment of Schedule 12 and Consequential Amendment) Regulations 2023. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Lesley Griffiths. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 36, no abstentions, 14 against. And therefore the motion is agreed.

Item 9. The Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016 (Amendment of Schedule 12 and Consequential Amendment) Regulations 2023: For: 36, Against: 14, Abstain: 0
Motion has been agreedClick to see vote results

We will now take a short break, before we move to the Stage 3 debate on the agriculture Bill.

Plenary was suspended at 16:53.

The Senedd reconvened at 17:05, with the Llywydd in the Chair.

11. Debate: Stage 3 of the Agriculture (Wales) Bill

That brings us to the Stage 3 consideration of the Agriculture (Wales) Bill.

Group 1: The Sustainable Land Management Objectives (Amendments 48, 49, 50, 39)

The first group of amendments this afternoon relates to the sustainable land management objectives. The lead amendment in the group is amendment 48 and I call on Samuel Kurtz to move the lead amendment and to speak to the other amendments in the group. Samuel Kurtz.

Amendment 48 (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Diolch, Llywydd. I wish to move and speak to all amendments in this group. Firstly, can I begin by thanking the Minister for being open to engagement with me during the progression of this Bill? It's very much appreciated. My thanks also to Lara Date, Katie Wyatt, Masudah Ali and Tom Livesey for their work and support, and, finally, to James Wallice from my own office who has worked tirelessly throughout all stages of this Bill.
I wish to speak to amendment 39, tabled in the name of Mabon ap Gwynfor. I would like to put on record my thanks to Plaid Cymru and the Welsh Government for tabling this amendment. As the Minister will be aware, strengthening the economic aspect of this legislation, specifically recognising agriculture's contribution to local economies, was a key ask of mine during Stage 2 of this Bill. Therefore, I'm pleased that the necessary steps to partially enhance and recognise this important component within the Agriculture (Wales) Bill have been taken with this amendment. We will be supporting it therefore.
However, we can and should be taking this recognition and support further. That's why I've taken the decision to table amendments 48, 49 and 50. Amendment 49 seeks to recognise the economic contributions of agriculture at the very heart of this piece of legislation. Without safeguarding rural livelihoods and communities, recognising the importance of sustainable and viable agricultural businesses and agricultural production to the rural economy, we risk undermining our collective efforts to produce sustainable food, mitigate climate change, maintain and enhance the resilience of our ecosystems, and conserve our countryside. We should not and cannot be seen to divorce these four key objectives from the economic and social needs or influences that farming families and food supply chain businesses experience. Should the Senedd choose to do this we risk not achieving these objectives at the scale and pace that is required. That's why, by installing a fifth objective that focuses solely on safeguarding the economic contributions that agriculture offers, we ensure that these core objectives are deliverable at the behest of the economically viable agricultural community.
Speaking to amendment 48, this has been tabled to strengthen the fourth objective in order to recognise the significance of enhancing the viability of our rural economy through the means of supporting farm businesses. By choosing to promote, protect and provide for the countryside, cultural resources and public access, we seek to encompass the wider role of the rural economy and enhance its viability. The amendment seeks to formally recognise that arrangement and enshrine it in the statute book, in line with the aspiration set out in recommendation 10 of the Economy, Trade, and Rural Affairs Committee legislative report.
Moving forward to amendment 50, the inclusion of the word 'economic' is yet another attempt to, again, recognise the intrinsic link between an economically sustainable agricultural sector and delivering upon these core objectives. Should we want our farmers to deliver the environmental benefits that we want them to, then they need to be economically viable in doing so. Diolch, Llywydd.

Mabon ap Gwynfor AS: Thank you for the collaboration with Government in the work on this Bill. That collaboration has been very constructive and I would like to take this opportunity to particularly thank the team who has helped us to get to this point: Cefin Campbell particularly, but I also put on record our thanks to Adam Price for leading in this regard and ensuring that we've reached a point where many sectors have come together, worked together and agreed on a way forward with the Agriculture (Wales) Bill.
I want to move amendment 39. The intention of this amendment is to emphasise the importance of agricultural businesses to local economies across Wales as part of the sustainable land management objectives, and to do so in a prominent place at the beginning of the legislation. It amends section 1(6), which sets out a list of the pertinent elements as to whether food and other goods are produced in a sustainable manner. So, the amendment adds to this list, making it clear that there is a clear link between the resilience of individual agricultural businesses, including their economic resilience, and their contribution therefore to the local economy. Of course, just a year ago the economic role of agriculture didn't appear in the Bill at all. So, it's good to see a move by Government in this regard and that they have listened to the voices of participants. Through our constructive work with Government at Stage 2, we could recognise the concept of an individual agricultural business, and therefore root the high-level ideas in the objectives and bring them alive in a practical way in terms of how they relate to farmers and farms on the face of the legislation.
However, we have been consistent in the view that it's not possible to sustainably manage land without people and communities that are viable, recognising the link between agriculture and the economic viability of rural Wales and rural communities in the broadest sense. This amendment will strengthen that element, making the Bill more complete, to reflect the importance of agriculture in a holistic way, making a clear link between agriculture and the economy.
Consider the importance of the food sector alone for the Welsh economy, and agriculture is the foundation of that. But agricultural units are far more than just farming; they contribute to tourism, retail, finance, engineering, manufacturing and other sectors. Recognising the important economic role of agriculture as a whole shows an appreciation of the central role of the sector to the life of our nation. Take a moment to consider tourism and the thousands who stay on farms, getting unique experiences of seeing how our food is produced. Indeed, come to Dolgellau on a Friday when the mart is there and see the cafes full to the brim as people come from far and near to buy and sell stock.
I would like to take this opportunity to respond to the disappointment that exists in the environmental sector about the missed opportunity to include nature restoration as part of the Bill, which would have ensured that Wales complies with the ambitions of COP15. Nature and agriculture do not live in isolation. Speak to most farmers and they live alongside nature and are keen to see the decline in nature being overturned. But this is not the end of the journey for any ambition to overturn nature's decline. Each and every one of us here must collaborate in order to ensure that nature restoration is given priority, and the sustainable farming scheme and the proposed legislation on biodiversity are opportunities for us to ensure that Wales leads the way in restoring our natural world. There is an opportunity also to state our desire to restore nature in the explanatory memorandum. So, in her response, I would like to hear the Minister recognising the importance of the need for nature restoration and a commitment to work towards this. Thank you very much.

Jenny Rathbone AC: We cannot go on endlessly trying to wring out every last amount of profit out of the land without any regard for the impact on the degradation of our soil and the destruction of our wildlife. So, while I'm happy to support Mabon ap Gwynfor's amendment, I think that the amendments proposed by Samuel Kurtz fail to address the extent of the wider diversity crisis that we face. It is simply unacceptable that wild animals are now outnumbered by domesticated animals that people keep at home, not even for production. That includes, of course, birds and insects. So, we absolutely have to ensure that this Bill really does deliver sustainable agriculture, whilst also ensuring that we have nature recovery. We simply, for future generations, cannot go on expanding, expanding and trying to get more productivity out of the land without any regard to its sustainability. Chucking more fertiliser onto degradated soil is not the future. We have to have methods of farming that ensure that we are nourishing the land and restoring nature to the hedgerows and other parts of the environment, which can co-exist with farming, as long as we are not simply ignoring the other creatures living on the land, because otherwise they will cease to exist and our grandchildren will never see them.

Jane Dodds AS: I'm grateful to have the opportunity to contribute to this landmark piece of legislation and also grateful to the Members who've moved these particular amendments. I'm also thankful to the Minister and her staff as well, who've helped in making this Bill. And I'd also like to thank other organisations, including the farming unions, some of whom I can see here in the gallery this evening, and other organisations as well, who've met with, I know, many of us in order to help influence this Bill.
Farming isn't just another sector of our economy. In Wales, more than anywhere else in Britain, farming and agriculture underpin entire communities, and, in many of those cases, many Welsh-speaking communities. This is a generational opportunity and the new legislative framework must underpin and secure the continued supply of safe, high-quality, traceable and affordable food for our nation in the context of future global pressures. Ensuring support for farm businesses to be economically resilient and sustainable goes hand in hand with nurturing thriving rural communities, as I've said, many of which are Welsh-speaking. We only have to look at agriculture's higher share of employment and GVA in Wales, more than anywhere else in the UK, to understand how vitally important it is that farm businesses and the sector as a whole need to be viable.
Amendment 49 makes explicit reference to the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 that requires us to work in an integrated way to create a resilient and prosperous Wales, which is what I believe this amendment will achieve by creating a new sustainable land management objective. I believe that these amendments on the face of the Bill, making express reference to the economic impact and significance of farm businesses and the wider sector in Wales, are critical, and critical to the face of the Bill. I hope that the Senedd will support this group of amendments. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

John Griffiths AC: I too am very pleased to speak in this very important debate on our very, very important legislation to improve how we take forward agriculture in Wales in the light of the environmental challenges that we and the world face. We know that some 90 per cent of land in Wales is farmed and managed, so it does make it very clear how important it is that that farming system, the farming businesses that we have in Wales, help us address the climate change and environmental challenges.
As Mabon referred to, Llywydd, environmental organisations are rather disappointed that there isn't going to be explicit wording in the legislation requiring the restoration of nature and biodiversity. We will have objective 3, which will require the maintenance and enhancement of ecosystem resilience, but the environmental organisations, or many of them in Wales, wanted the legislation to go further than that to require restoration, as I mentioned. So, in the absence of that wording in the Bill, and what will become the Act, I wonder if the Minister might commit today to updating the explanatory memorandum to make explicit reference to COP15 and the global biodiversity framework, and also a statement that actions under objective 3 in the sustainable farming scheme will be contributions by Welsh Government towards achieving the framework.The new memorandum could also state that any scheme arising must have regard to any future nature restoration and biodiversity strategies of Welsh Government, including those to implement COP15's global biodiversity framework.Minister, it would also be good if you could commit, on the record today, that the need to ensure the restoration of nature will be further considered in the forthcoming environmental governance and nature targets Bill before the end of this Senedd.
Turning to access, it's good to see public access in objective 4 and the purposes for support. We want to see the people of Wales more closely connected with our wonderful natural environment. If we do that effectively, it greatly improves quality of life in Wales, and I think enlists greater support for our environmental objectives and schemes. However, I do think that maintaining and enhancing access must not result in payments focusing on the delivery of existing statutory duties to maintain access. Rather, it should be about making improvements, such as better quality and more inclusive access. Again, I think the explanatory memorandum could be changed to make clear that access provisions will drive improvements to access. And that explanatory memorandum, I believe, should also include examples of access to blue spaces—inland and coastal waters—to make it clear that farmers who create or improve such access will receive payments in support. Diolch, Llywydd.

Huw Irranca-Davies AC: This is very much a landmark moment as we come to Stage 3 of this Bill. The Bill isn't the be-all and end-all of where we are either in terms of farming and farming support, and rural livelihoods, or in terms of nature recovery, nature restoration and biodiversity. But it is of signal importance because of the role that this will play, subject to other legislation coming down the line, which I'll touch on in a moment.
I want to thank Sam Kurtz and Mabon for laying the amendments they have, because they have provoked an interesting early debate on how you actually balance the overall objectives of this Bill and make sure that we deliver everything, and actually that there's not some imbalance where one priority takes precedence totally over another. Mabon, I agree with your points entirely that this false dichotomy that says that you can either farm and have food production or you can have nature restoration is wrong. I think Mabon and many others were at the event that was held here last week in the Senedd with the Nature Friendly Farming Network, which showed that that is indeed a false dichotomy. I think the future of farming here in Wales, for a number of reasons, is based on the type of farming that replenishes the soil, enriches and cleans our rivers, develops that biodiverse, knowledge-driven, experience-driven approach across individual farms and individual fields, and also produces those rich livelihoods that sustain not only the farmers and the farming families themselves, but also the communities in which they operate and the Welsh language and all those things. We have a type of farming we want to see in Wales, and the economic things that Sam has touched on, and that you've touched on, are very, very important, but so is that wider panoply of things that we're trying to achieve. So, this is quite a moment.
Sarah Murphy and I were out last week with some of our guests in the gallery and others, and with Gemma, a tenant farmer on Coity common. Coity straddles Bridgend and Ogmore, across the motorway, with a bridge, and we're still trying, Ministers, to sort out getting a parapet to protect the animals from jumping off the edge. We'll come back to that on another day. But it's a really interesting area. Gemma is a tenant farmer who is actually introducing now, with good advice from the agricultural sector and with her own environmental background and knowledge, and putting on those fields on that common, which were turning back to a pretty poor standard, the type of cattle and the type of grazing livestock that are actually enriching the landscape and the biodiversity, which is also, hopefully as she expands, going to deliver her a great livelihood. We'll turn back to Gemma later on, but, Minister, if we are going to deliver genuinely not just those wider benefits and the economic benefits, and so on—and, Mabon, I would agree with what Jenny was saying, I'm taken with the amendment that you have, which is focusing on the contribution made to the local economy made by agricultural businesses within the communities in which they operate—that localism, that embedding of farming within the local economy is exactly where we need to be, it really is.
But if we're also going to do the nature aspects of this and the biodiversity aspects, I'm going to repeat, with no apology whatsoever, some of the things that John said in his contribution, and go further. The Minister has engaged with us hugely, and we thank her for this, over several months, before the nature restoration amendment became a thing. Long before then, we were trying to think of ways in which we could embed, within this, nature biodiversity and nature restoration. We've got to this point now where there is some disappointment out there, but I'm seeking her assurance that there is a way forward, partly within this Bill and what we can do in terms of an explanatory memorandum, and partly from what flows after it with her colleague Julie James, the Minister for Climate Change, as well. So, we do want to see commitments being made in this debate, Minister, to update the explanatory memorandum. As John has said, we need an explicit reference in the explanatory memorandum to the COP15 Kunming-Montreal global biodiversity framework. We need a statement that actions under this objective in the sustainable farming scheme, which is running in parallel alongside this Bill, will amount to contributions by the Welsh Government towards achieving that.
In that revised memorandum,it should also make clear that any scheme coming forward must have regard in the future to future nature restoration and biodiversity strategies produced by the Welsh Government. We've been told by Welsh Government that this isn't the only game in town; okay, so tell us what the game is, when we will deliver those outcomes so we have full nature restoration. And by the way, this isn't—. Because I spoke with some in the farming unions recently, when nature restoration was being mooted as an amendment, and they were very fearful that this was a criticism of all farming in Wales. I know, and everybody in here will know, from our engagement with farmers over many years, from the Farmers Union of Wales, from the National Farmers Union, from the upland hill farmers association, from the Nature Friendly Farming Network, that that is not true. There are many, many great examples of good biodiversity on farms already, of great spatial plans by farmers working together in places like Coity Wallia and elsewhere. But we do need to acknowledge that there are areas we really need to work on where we have to have nature restoration as well, because the land, the soil and the water have been denuded to such an extent that we need to focus on that.
We need a commitment on the Senedd Record from Government that the issue will be revisited by, as John said, the forthcoming environmental governance and nature targets Bill, commonly referred to as the 'nature-positive Wales Bill', before the end of this Senedd—before the end of this Senedd. We cannot leave it to a future Government. We either have a nature crisis or we do not. The farmers will work with us on this if we set out how we're going to do it, so I'm looking for that commitment. And the commitment also needs to include updating the existing 'maintain and enhance' framework defined by the Environment (Wales) Act 2016, and objective 3 of the Agriculture (Wales) Bill 2022, so they include nature restoration in line with the global biodiversity framework.
And just finally, the Government has to commit to ensuring that the design of the sustainable farming scheme, which is running in parallel, as I say, must require nature restorative actions within all those tiers of support, and that a full assessment will be provided of the universal tiers' projected impact on nature's recovery, and the agricultural sector's carbon emissions too.
So, with that, and looking forward to hearing the Minister's words on the record with this, this opening debate has allowed a proper airing of getting the balance right here, working with farmers, working with landowners, working with tenant farmers, to deliver the multiple benefits of this Bill, but also, this is not the finished game. So, I'm looking to hear that from the Minister as well.
And just finally, to say, Minister, I hope that in your response today you'll also be able to commit to working with the farming unions, with farmers themselves, but also with those environmental organisations externally, and to meet with them, and for Julie James, the Minister for Climate Change, to meet with them subsequent to this Bill if it passes Stage 3 today, to meet with them and discuss how we can bolt down nature and biodiversity in the forthcoming work as well. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

The Minister to contribute, Lesley Griffiths.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Diolch, Llywydd. I, too, would like to start with some 'thank yous'. I'd like to thank my excellent Bill team, many of whom had not worked on legislation before, and all Welsh Government officials who've worked on this very important piece of legislation. I'd like to thank Members of the Senedd for working with me, especially Sam Kurtz, Jane Dodds, and Cefin Campbell and Mabon ap Gwynfor as part of the co-operation agreement on Plaid Cymru benches, and of course to all stakeholders—farming unions who are in the gallery today, and obviously our environmental non-governmental organisations.
I'd like to start by speaking to the amendments in this group, and then I will address points brought forward by other Members. Starting with amendment 48 in the name of Sam Kurtz, this amendment seeks to amend the fourth sustainable land managementobjective, to make enhancing economic viability the overall purpose of the first part of the objective. A similar amendment was tabled at Stage 2, and that was to include 'protect economic viability' within the fourth objective, and that amendment was not agreed. It is important to recognise that the purpose of the fourth objective is to conserve and enhance the countryside and cultural resources, which include cultural heritage and the historic environment. This objective also involves promoting public access to and engagement with the countryside and cultural resources, as well as sustaining the Welsh language and promoting and facilitating its use. The objective therefore focuses on important social and cultural outcomes, as well as the potential for economic and other benefits. To accept this amendment would alter the fourth objective's intended purpose, making enhancing economic viability the overall purpose of the first part of the objective, possibly to the detriment of the other parts of the objective, which are no less important. It also introduces an unclear and new term into the Bill, which could have uncertain and unintended consequences, as it is untested against the SLM duties.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Amendment 49 and amendment 39. I support amendment 39, which has been tabled by Plaid Cymru here today and which recognises the importance of the contribution to their local economy of farm and other agricultural businesses within their communities. The amendment will highlight, for the purposes of the first SLM objective, the contribution to the local economy made by agricultural businesses within the communities in which they operate. This amendment demonstrates our joint commitment to recognising the benefits that farm and other agricultural businesses provide to their local communities. We have specifically avoided using the term 'rural' within the first objective, so as not to exclude certain non-rural communities where agricultural and ancillary activities may take place. Furthermore, to state 'safeguard' as safeguarding livelihoods and communities is beyond the scope of this Bill. For example, this could mean a corner shop in a rural community has the potential to call on the Government for financial support. This is a consequence I'm sure we all want to avoid.
I would like to remind Members of the accepted Government amendment 29, which was tabled at Stage 2. This recognises the importance of agricultural businesses within the communities in which they operate. The combination of this Stage 2 Government amendment, and today's amendment 39, tabled by Plaid Cymru, ensures there is appropriate provisions within the Bill to recognise the importance of farm and other agricultural businesses to their local communities. A fifth SLM objective, as tabled in amendment 49, is unnecessary.
Amendment 50, tabled by Sam Kurtzto section 1(6), makes provision about factors relevant to determining whether food and other goods are produced in a sustainable manner for the purposes of the first SLM objective. Amendment 50 seeks to qualify the term 'resilience' in that provision with the insertion of 'economic' beforehand. The resilience of agricultural businesses within the communities in which they operate as one of the factors relevant to determining whether food and other goods are produced in a sustainable manner should not be restricted to only their economic resilience. It should, and does, include the broader sense of the term 'resilience', which encompasses, for example, environmental, social and economic resilience. Narrowing the scope of the first objective through this amendment could prevent farmers from being supported in the ways most effective for their business—a situation we wish to avoid.
If I can turn to some of the points raised by other Members, sustainable land management absolutely lies at the core of this Bill. The objectives and the SLM duty focus action on sustainable food production responding to climate change, as well as our cultural heritage and language, and protecting and improving the ecosystems that support our country's flora and fauna. These objectives, taken together, address the declared climate and nature emergencies, and set out the long-term framework for future agricultural policy and support. The third SLM objective underpins the significance of ecosystem resilience in Wales's agricultural policy, and section 1(7) of the Bill expressly recognises that biodiversity of ecosystems is a factor relevant to consider when taking action to maintain and enhance the resilience of ecosystems. This recognises that, for an ecosystem to be resilient, it requires diversity within and between ecosystems, including, therefore, biological diversity too.
I think it's also important to recognise that the SLM objectives are designed to be complementary. For example, it's intended that action to contribute to sustainable food production, and to conserve and enhance the countryside, will also improve our biodiversity and promote nature recovery. So, by supporting farmers to use sustainable farming practices, we contribute to nature recovery, whilst also supporting a resilient agricultural sector, fully aligned with the SLM objectives that have been outlined in this Bill.
As part of the Government that was probably the first in the world to declare both climate and nature emergencies, I absolutely recognise the significance of addressing these vital challenges. Consequently, I will update the explanatory memorandum for the Agriculture (Wales) Bill to reference the COP15 Kunming-Montreal global biodiversity framework, affirming this Government's commitment to contributing to its goals through, for example, actions under the sustainable farming scheme. The SLM objectives, I should say, are not time bound. They take account of changing commitments going forward, and that's critical as we understand more of the impacts and the mitigation that we're seeing from climate change.
There were references to other pieces of legislation that could be brought forward. Obviously, the First Minister will update us on the legislative programme. He updates us every year, and that will be before the summer recess. But the intended environmental governance and biodiversity targets Bill will provide the main opportunity to set out our overall approach to nature recovery and restoration in Wales. That will include domestic biodiversity targets, which then will support the delivery of the Kunming-Montreal global biodiversity framework, in addition to our existing commitments, such as the well-being goals. The SLM objectives, as drafted, mean the agricultural sector will be well placed to contribute to these targets and to nature recovery.
Maintaining and enhancing ecosystem resilience underpins nature restoration, and I'm very happy to continue to work very closely with my colleague the Minister for Climate Change, looking at the piece of legislation as we develop it. I'm happy to consider what further is needed to deliver against the GBF. And, of course, we'll be very happy to continue to work our stakeholders—the environmental organisations and, indeed, the farming unions.
Huw Irranca-Davies mentioned the parallel piece of work that we're doing around development of the sustainable farming scheme. The actions within that scheme will absolutely be consistent with the SLM duty and objectives, and that includes the objective to maintain and enhance the resilience of our ecosystems, and the benefits they provide—so, for example, by supporting farmers to adopt sustainable farming methods, many of which they're already doing: establishing woodlands; managing carbon-rich soils, like our peatlands; and enhancing semi-natural habitat scale, connectivity and diversity. We know that these initiatives, just a few of them I've mentioned, promote responsible stewardship, and they allow our ecosystems and nature to absolutely thrive in harmony with our farmers and with our agricultural sector. By supporting farmers to use sustainable farming practices, we contribute to nature recovery.
I mentioned that the fourth SLM objective includes provision to promote public access to and engagement with the countryside and our cultural resources, and that does include improving access, and that includes access for disabled people, as well as maintaining the access that we have as well. So, just to say that the sustainable farming scheme is being designed on the basis of payment for actions, and that's beyond the regulatory requirements that we currently have. The scheme will therefore not pay farmers for existing statutory duties.
John Griffiths asked about access to blue spaces, for instance, and that's a level of detail that will be relevant in the proposed sustainable farming scheme. And again, I've committed to consulting on the sustainable farming scheme again before the end of this year. Diolch.

Samuel Kurtzto reply to the debate.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Diolch, Llywydd. I'm grateful to everybody who's contributed in the opening of this debate this afternoon on Stage 3 of the agriculture Bill. To take the points that have been made in relation to the amendments in my name, what underpins this, and I stress the point that this is an agriculture Bill, is that we need an economically viable agricultural industry in Wales to deliver those environmental benefits that we want to be seeing. If we do not have farmers on the land farming the land in a sustainable way, we will not have those sustainable farming scheme objectives and those SLM objectives delivered and we will not see those benefits that are required. And there is no disagreement, I don't think, within the Chamber on that point.
But what I do find frustrating is the idea that agriculture has been this exploitative, extractive industry over the years, whilst it's followed a common agricultural policy put forward through our membership of the European Union, where all ills land on the door of the farmers. I think it's wholly wrong for an industry that supports so many jobs in Wales. It underpins our communities, as Jane Dodds and Mabon ap Gwynfor have so eloquently put. It underpins the communities that we represent, underpins the language that we are so proud to protect, and underpins our rural way of life, the schools that our children go to, the communities that we go to and live in. Agriculture is that bedrock in terms of that here in Wales. I think it's disappointing that the debate, at times—not here today—has been polarised, has been binary. This is a way forward, and I do think that, with the amendment put forward through the co-operation agreement, there is positivity. And, as Mabon rightly stressed, this has come a long way from the initial consultation following our leaving of the European Union.
Jenny Rathbone made a point with regard to wildlife being outnumbered by agricultural animals. I would really like to see the data source for that, because if we think of wildlife, all the way from a shrew to a field mouse right up to the birds in our skies, being outnumbered by agricultural animals in Wales—I'm sorry, Jenny, I just cannot believe that, but I would be willing to sit down with you and talk about that point. I cannot see how that can be true.
In John Griffiths's contribution, talking about access, that's absolutely right. How can we, as an agricultural industry, advocates for the agricultural industry, show the good that we are doing, that our industry does, if we don't have access? But that access must understand that these are working places, that there are risks when it comes to farms and farm life and agricultural machinery and animals and livestock. So, it's really important that balance is found, which comes to the point from Huw Irranca-Davies. This debate is for the need of balance, which is absolutely right. At times, this debate started off—not today, over the years—as a binary choice between the environment or agriculture. Over those years that debate has become less binary and there's a forward way, so that is a really positive step forward.
You mention the sustainable farming scheme running parallel to the agriculture Bill; I would argue that it actually sits underneath the agriculture Bill. This agriculture Bill is the framework in which the SFS will be delivered, therefore those SLM objectives are really important in how that sustainable farming scheme will be delivered. And if we don't have farmers signing up to those sustainable farming schemes, if they're not economically viable, farmers will not sign up to those sustainable farming schemes, we will not see the environmental and biodiversity benefits that we wish to see, so it's really important that the economic point—. I can see the Member is gesturing for an intervention, but I'll just finish this point. It's really important that they have to be attractive, and financially attractive, to make sure that these schemes are signed up to. I'll give way to the Member.

Huw Irranca-Davies AC: I don't think we're talking at cross purposes, Sam, because I think with that detailed work going on underneath this—and you are right—that's exactly the phrase I always use when I meet with farmers and farming representatives: that's where you burn the midnight oil to get it absolutely right. That does require a lot of effort, not only from Ministers, but from farmers themselves, to engage with that and get that balance. So I genuinely don't think we're talking at cross purposes. The question here, in the amendments in the first group, is whether we get the balance right and we imbalance those four competing—. They're not competing, actually; they should be, actually, sympathetic to each other if we can get this right. But the detail is crucial.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Absolutely, and that detail is really imperative. But underpinning that is the farmers' economic viability. If farmers are no longer farming the land, these schemes won't be enacted, the environment will not be looked after by the custodians of the land, and we won't have those benefits.
And just to come to the point in terms of food production, are we content as a nation to offset our conscience by importing food from countries that have lower environmental standards than ours here in Wales? I think not. Our food sovereignty is an imperative part of that. That's where the hand-in-glove of the environmental elements of this and the food production are imperative. I can see Jenny is looking to intervene. I'll give way.

Jenny Rathbone AC: Actually, you're absolutely right: we cannot be exporting our carbon emissions. That is why we have to be producing the food we need locally, so that we are reducing our carbon emissions in that regard, and we need to support our farming community to ensure that that happens. So, that is very, very important.
And, by the way, as I'm on my feet, the number of wild animals is smaller than the number of domestic animals we keep for our pleasure—i.e. horses, dogs and cats. Cattle, sheep, pigs and all the others we produce for eating hugely outweigh the amount of wild animals.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Thank you. I'm willing to sit down with you to discuss that further. Because, as Darren has just chuntered from the left of me, a single ant nest would have thousands of ants in it. But I'm willing to sit down with you on that point.
But, absolutely, we have to be producing food in our country and farmers need to be incentivised to produce that food in a way that goes forward so our supermarket shelves and our farmers' markets have domestic food within them, and that's why economic viability is so fundamental to the delivery of agriculture. So, I'm grateful for what has been a very thorough 45 minuteson an opening group of amendments, Llywydd. So, on that point, I will sit down. Diolch.

Don't apologise, it was fascinating.

The question is that amendment 48 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection, so we will proceed to a vote on amendment 48. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 26, no abstentions, 26 against. And therefore, the vote is equal, and I'll cast my vote against amendment 48, as I'm required to do. And so, the amendment is not agreed, with 26 for and 27 against.

Amendment 48: For: 26, Against: 26, Abstain: 0
As there was an equality of votes, the Llywydd used her casting vote in accordance with Standing Order 6.20(ii).
Amendment has been rejectedClick to see vote results

Amendment 49 is next, in the name of Samuel Kurtz. Is it being moved?

Amendment 49 (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

Yes, it is being moved. And the question is that amendment 49 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection, so we will proceed to a vote on amendment 49. Open the vote. Close the vote. The vote is equal: 26 for, 26 against, and so I use my casting vote against amendment 49. And the result of that is that there are 26 for the amendment and 27 against the amendment, and so amendment 49 is not agreed.

Amendment 49: For: 26, Against: 26, Abstain: 0
As there was an equality of votes, the Llywydd used her casting vote in accordance with Standing Order 6.20(ii).
Amendment has been rejectedClick to see vote results

Amendment 50. Is it being moved?

Amendment 50 (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

Yes, it is being moved by Samuel Kurtz. The question is that amendment 50 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. We will have a vote on amendment 50. Open the vote. Close the vote. The result of the vote is 26 for, 26 against, no abstentions. The vote is tied, and therefore I use my casting vote against amendment 50. And therefore amendment 50 is not agreed—26 in favour, 27 against.

Amendment 50: For: 26, Against: 26, Abstain: 0
As there was an equality of votes, the Llywydd used her casting vote in accordance with Standing Order 6.20(ii).
Amendment has been rejectedClick to see vote results

Amendment 39 is next. Is it being moved by Mabon ap Gwynfor?

Amendment 39 (Mabon ap Gwynfor) moved.

Yes, it is being moved. The question is that amendment 39 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Therefore, amendment 39 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Group 2: Equal Status of the Objectives (Amendment 51)

Group 2 is next, and these amendments relate to the equal status of the objectives. The lead and only amendment in this group is amendment 51, and I call on Samuel Kurtz to move and speak to the amendment.

Amendment 51 (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Diolch, Llywydd. I wish to move and speak to amendment 51 in this group—the equal status of all four sustainable land management objectives. This amendment has been pursued during Stage 3 in order to remove any potential hierarchical status set within the four sustainable land management objectives. As it stands, the Minister's reliance upon their contribution to the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 is not a sufficient nor guaranteed safeguard that will ensure that the Bill delivers upon all key objectives and goals equally and uniformly. It is not adequate enough to assume that this Government, or any future Government, will treat these objectives equally and fairly. All objectives within this legislation ought to be explicit, comprehensive, and delivered correspondingly. Amendment 51 seeks to clarify this position and ensure that the Welsh Government obeys this standard. Diolch, Llywydd.

The Minister to contribute, Lesley Griffiths.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Thank you. This amendment was tabled at Stage 2 and was not agreed by Members at the time. I just want to reiterate that the sustainable land management objectives as drafted in the Bill are to be considered together. There is no hierarchy, so this amendment is therefore unnecessary.
The effect of the SLM duty in the Bill is to require the Welsh Ministers to consider all four SLM objectives and then to exercise the relevant function in the way they consider best contributes to achieving those objectives when they are taken together. The SLM duty sets a high threshold and clear direction, so the Welsh Ministers must act in the way they think best contributes to achieving the SLM objectives overall, with no hierarchy between the objectives. The duty applies across a wide range of agricultural functions, so that's sections 2 and 3, and also provides the flexibility necessary, for example, to take action that does not necessarily contribute to all of the objectives equally, provided the Welsh Ministers consider that the action taken best contributes to achieving the SLM objectives overall.
I'll give you an example. Should there need to be an emergency response to a livestock or a crop pandemic that necessitated the destruction of animals or plants, farmers would expect compensation for their loss, and that may match the first objective, but it could run counter to objectives two to four. So, should the proposed amendment be included, this could prevent support being provided. Welsh Ministers need the flexibility provided by the current drafting of the Bill for the benefit of the agriculture industry.

Samuel Kurtz to reply.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Diolch, Llywydd. I'm grateful for the Minister's explanation as to why the Government won't be supporting this amendment. Indeed, it's very similar to what she provided at the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee, when she said, and I quote:
'SLM objectives...are to be considered together, with no hierarchy'—
understood, but then the Minister went on to concede that:
'it will be possible...to make a significant contribution to one of them whilst making, perhaps, little or indeed no contribution to the others'.
Indeed, it was a recommendation of the ETRA committee report into the agriculture Bill. I think the need for equality amongst all four of the sustainable land management objectives ensures that there's uniformity in delivery and that there's no preferential treatment in terms of any Government support. I would urge Members to support this amendment. Diolch, Llywydd.

The question is that amendment 51 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. We will proceed to a vote on amendment 51. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 26, 26 against, therefore I must use my casting vote against amendment 51. And so, the result of the vote is that amendment 51 is not agreed, with 26 in favour and 27 against.

Amendment 51: For: 26, Against: 26, Abstain: 0
As there was an equality of votes, the Llywydd used her casting vote in accordance with Standing Order 6.20(ii).
Amendment has been rejectedClick to see vote results

Group 3: Definitions of agriculture and ancillary activities (Amendments 2, 3, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75)

The next group of amendments is group 3, and they relate to definitions of 'agriculture' and 'ancillary activities'. The lead amendment in this group is amendment 2, and I call on the Minister to move and speak to the lead amendment and the other amendments in the group.

Amendment 2 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Diolch, Llywydd. Amendments 2 and 3 tabled in my name provide clarity in section 2 of the Bill. The amendments guide the reader to the definitions of 'agriculture' and 'ancillary activity' respectively. This ensures that the reader is signposted to the meaning of those terms as defined for the purposes of the Bill.
Amendments 66 to 75, tabled in the name of Sam Kurtz, are already covered very clearly by the definition as drafted, and so are not required. For example, the amendment to add the use of land as osier land in unnecessary, as the growing and cultivation of willow is already captured in the definition under 48(1)(f),
'using land as farm woodland or for agroforestry',
and 48(1)(h),
'otherwise growing plants for sale, or for the sale of part of a plant'.
This amendment does not widen the scope of the definition or provide any clarification, so is not required.
Similarly, requests to add fruit, seeds, the production of animal feed and market gardens are already catered for in the definition of agriculture. Meadow land is a habitat that is catered for in the definition of ancillary activities. Amendment 75 attempts to link the definition of agriculture back to the SLM duty, but the SLM duty already requires that Welsh Ministers must exercise their functions under the Bill in a way they consider best contributes to the SLM objectives. In this way, the SLM duty applies already to the provision of support for or the regulation of activities listed under the definition of agriculture.

Samuel Kurtz MS: I begin by welcoming amendments 2 and 3, put forward in the name of the Minister. As the Minister has referenced, these amendments are somewhat procedural and, therefore, we will be supporting them. But, with regard to amendments 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74 and, finally, 75, these have been tabled through working with the Tenant Farmers Association to ensure that those tenant farmers aren't excluded through the definitions of agriculture, moving forward, within the agriculture Bill and any support mechanisms, therefore, in the future. So, I would urge Members to ensure that our tenant farmers aren't excluded from any potential future support. Diolch, Llywydd.

The Minister to reply.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Diolch, Llywydd. I think I set out very clearly why the amendments tabled in the name of Sam Kurtz weren't required due to the definitions being very clearly described in the Bill as drafted, so I ask Members to accept my Government amendments 2 and 3 and to not agree amendments 66 to 75, tabled in the name of Sam Kurtz.

The question is that amendment 2 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Amendment 2 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 3, in the name of the Minister. Is that moved formally?

Amendment 3 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Move.

Yes, it is. The question is that amendment 3 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Therefore, amendment 3 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Group 4: Provision of support for farmers (Amendments 4, 52, 53, 54, 38, 55)

The next group of amendments is group 4, and these relate to the provision of support for farmers. The lead amendment in this group is amendment 4, and I call on the Minister to move and speak to the lead amendment and the other amendments in the group.

Amendment 4 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Diolch, Llywydd. Amendment 4, tabled in my name, introduces a subsection to section 2 to provide clarity on the application of the SLM duty to functions referred to in section 2(2)(b) and (c). Section 2(2)(b) and (c) cover a wide range of functions and some of the functions may be exercised for a broad range of purposes. This does not affect the application of the SLM duty to functions under the Agriculture (Wales) Bill.
The SLM duty is intended to apply to functions under section 2(2)(b) and (c) only to the extent that those functions are exercised to provide support for, or to regulate, agriculture or other activities carried out on land used for agriculture or ancillary activities. This amendment clarifies this, and therefore makes it clear that the duty does not apply to those functions where they are exercised for some other purpose.
Amendment 52, as tabled by Sam Kurtz, would qualify the scope of sustainability in the purpose by requiring the food production to be economically, socially and culturally sustainable, as well as environmentally sustainable. This amendment was tabled at Stage 2 and was not agreed. It sets a high threshold, and whilst farmers will be supported to produce food sustainably, they may not always meet all of the elements set out in the amendment. This is not a burden I am prepared to impose on our farmers.
Section 8(2)(a) was drafted and agreed under the co-operation agreement. Consequently, this purpose has been carefully considered and drafted, and I do not consider that any further amendment is necessary. I would like to remind Members that this is a non-exhaustive list of purposes, for which Welsh Ministers may in particular provide support.
Amendments 53 and 54, tabled in the name of Sam Kurtz, seek to introduce new purposes of support under section 8. Again, both of these amendments were tabled at Stage 2 and were not agreed. In respect of amendment 53, this would add a new purpose into section 8 to expressly reference support for agricultural activities, whether they are new or existing. The Bill does not define agricultural activity and such inclusion would require definition. This amendment, therefore, is considered unnecessary.
Turning to amendment 54, this amendment seeks to introduce a purpose of supporting new entrants to undertake an agricultural activity. As Members will be aware, during Stage 2, I introduced a Government amendment to include a new purpose of improving the resilience of agricultural businesses, which captures supporting new entrants to the sector and is not limited to existing agricultural businesses. I've ensured that, following Stage 2 amendments, the explanatory memorandum was updated to reflect this. I would also like to clarify that all of the purposes in section 8 will enable support across all levels of businesses in the sector, from new entrants to experienced farmers. To single out one specific group might imply that they are not intended to be captured within any support provided under the other purposes, and is not something I would wish to see. Therefore, I do not support amendment
On amendment 38, tabled in the name of Jane Dodds, I recognise the importance of this amendment in keeping farmers on the land through supporting agricultural businesses to adopt effective energy management, helping them to reduce their operating costs and generate renewable energy on their land. The amendment puts on the face of the Bill Welsh Ministers' commitment to provide support to our farmers and agricultural businesses in actions towards adopting energy efficiency practices that will have a positive impact and benefits to not only their business resilience, but also the wider communities, the environment and the nature and climate emergencies.
Amendment 55, tabled in the name of Sam Kurtz, was raised during Stage 2. Any support given under section 8 has to be for or in connection with agriculture and ancillary activities. I would like to emphasise amendment 55 risks narrowing the support Ministers may provide, especially in relation to those beneficiaries whose actions are undertaken in the best interests of the agricultural sector but are not farmers themselves—so, for example, veterinary surgeons. I do not want to limit support to the sector in this way.

Samuel Kurtz MS: I would like to begin by speaking to amendment 4, tabled under the Minister's name. Once again, this is a welcome measure that has been outlined and that seeks to specifically link the duties of the Welsh Minister to objectives of agriculture and ancillary activity. We will be supporting.
Touching upon amendment 38, this is a welcome contribution from Jane Dodds, and it very much mirrors an amendment of mine from Stage 2, and I'm delighted that the Minister says she recognises the importance of it at Stage 3. I only wish that she'd recognised its importance at Stage 2 when I put it down, but, alas, that's politics. But we will be supporting this, and I'm grateful to Jane Dodds for putting that amendment through.
Shifting focus to the amendments tabled under my name, amendment 52 has been tabled in order to ensure that food production is considered within the context of socioeconomic needs, the cultural demands of communities and populations, and environmentally sustainable methods of production, which I think is exactly what this agriculture Bill is trying to do. Given our attempted intention to remove any potential hierarchical status, this amendment seeks to supplement this change and ensure that our collective efforts to produce food are done in a recognised, sustainable manner that ensures we're addressing all potential challenges, not just those that are environmental.
Amendment 53 has been drafted in order to provide specific and dedicated support for all new entrants and those choosing to return to the industry. Indeed, this is very much a call that has been reiterated throughout the whole legislative process. Several key industry stakeholders still remain concerned that the Bill in its current form lacks concrete provision and support for new entrants, and so this targeted approach ensures that support can be given, whilst not shutting the door on those already within the industry.
Amendment 54 takes this a step further, providing explicit support for new entrants by naming them in a way that places a sole purpose on enticing new entrants into the industry through the utilisation of tailored, specific packages of support that seek to encompass every aspect of agricultural activity as defined later in the Bill. Going back to my opening remarks, if we don't have farmers farming the land, delivering on these sustainable farming schemes, we won't see those benefits, therefore, we need to entice new entrants into the industry, and I believe these amendments do that. Diolch, Llywydd.

Jane Dodds AS: I'll be speaking to amendment 38, which is tabled in my name, and I'm very grateful to Sam for his gracious support for something that, obviously, he thought about and had, perhaps, put into the ether. Thank you very much. Diolch yn fawr iawn.
I do welcome the opportunity to contribute to such an important and transformational part of Welsh legislation, one that will have a positive and lasting impact on our valued agricultural sector and on many of my constituents. The Bill is a generational opportunity to effect positive change for our world-class agricultural sector, helping our farmers to do what they do best—to farm and produce food and other goods—and to support the links between our farmers, their local communities and our natural environments. We need to support the sector to undertake actions that encourage and support their business resilience and to support an environment of innovation, using, for example, data, which many farm businesses have been doing for many, many years. Supporting these businesses to adopt innovative practices whilst maintaining the traditional ways of farming that have been an important part of Wales for generations is crucial for keeping farmers on our land for now and in the future. It is my belief that we can do more to support this vitally important sector to continue and enhance the innovation we've already seen. With this in mind, I am pleased to table this amendment to include a further purpose in the list at section 8 of the Bill, which will expressly reference effective energy management in agricultural businesses across the sector. This amendment on the face of the Bill specifically highlights that support that may be provided to encourage effective energy management in our agricultural businesses. The aim of such support, alongside the environmental benefits, is to create those opportunities and sustain our farming communities. This includes reduced energy costs by adopting efficient practices as well as generating renewable energy on their land. I want be clear that it is not the intent of this purpose to enable the sale of agricultural land for wind or solar farming. The purpose is to support farm businesses and keep farmers on the land by adapting and using innovative practices and long-term solutions to help reduce their operating costs.
As we face the climate emergency, every sector has to play their role, so this amendment supports the contribution of our agricultural sector whilst at the same time doing so in a way that makes their business more sustainable and aiding profitability. I have tabled an amendment that I consider has the potential for Welsh Ministers to support both long- and short-term actions to enable our agricultural businesses to adopt these—one that enables farmers the choice of and option to consider a range of opportunities to drive effective energy management and renewable energy generation. In doing so, this has the potential to have a positive effect not only on their businesses, but the sector and Wales at large. Whilst this amendment makes direct reference to effective energy management, a very important issue, in my view, is that the amendment is set in the context of the wide-ranging, non-exhaustive nature of the power of support in section 8, alongside a number of amendments. I look forward to working with the Welsh Government as they continue to develop their support proposals, and I very much hope that the Senedd will support my amendment. Diolch.

Ken Skates AC: Just to say I strongly support amendment 38. It's certainly strengthening the Bill, and it's an amendment that will both enable and encourage innovation and creativity in responding to the climate emergency, as Jane Dodds has outlined, whilst also certainly driving sustainability in the farming community. And I think the amendment also demonstrates most clearly how backbenchers and Members across the Chamber are able to influence legislation and improve it. In this instance, I have no doubt that farmers in Clwyd South will approve of the amendment.

Jenny Rathbone AC: I, too, am very pleased to support Jane Dodds's amendment. I think it's really good to have it on the face of the Bill, so it's absolutely clear that this is something that we welcome from farmers, because there are so many opportunities for farmers to be using solar energy, ground-source heat pumps, hydroelectricity—we used to use hydroelectricity when we didn't have people on the grid. Also, there are other innovative ways that I know have been used to reduce the amount of energy that is having to be used for farming activities. Why would you want to buy energy from the grid when you can generate it yourself?
And I recall that, in Baden Württemberg, when the environment committee visited back in 2015, myself and Llyr Gruffydd among them, we saw the amount of energy that can be generated from the heat transfer from the milk of the cows, which obviously came out warm and needed to be cooled in order to extend its life for consumption by humans. The heat transfer just from the milk generated enough energy to run the milking parlour and heat the farmhouse next door. So, this is something that I hope, by having this on the face of the Bill, will encourage farmers to think of ways in which they can be reducing their costs and increasing their productivity.

Huw Irranca-Davies AC: I won't reiterate at length the support for the encouraging of effective energy management. I think that's really welcome—to have something explicit there within the Bill. Many of the farmers in my constituency, in Ogmore, were early adopters of renewable energy, but also of energy conservation because they had to, because that's the only way to make their businesses run effectively, quite frankly. So, I think having something like this—and if it encourages and drives more activity towards that—is good.
But I wanted to speak to something else that the Minister has tempted me to, and thank you Sam and Jane for the amendments in provoking this discussion. I mentioned that, last week, Sarah Murphy and I were out on Coity Wallia with Gemma Haines, and I think Gemma and her cattle are something of celebrities, because they've not only appeared in press releases, but also on television, I understand, as well. But she's a new entrant, and many new entrants come in through tenant farming and then they need to build their business up. As we're often told by many of the farmers out there, and by farming unions, farmers are getting older and older, generally speaking. We're all getting older, but farmers, demographically, are getting older and older—that bell shape is rising up there. So, we do need younger entrants coming in who are enthused about the type of changes that are within this agriculture Bill and the associated changes—we've talked as well about biodiversity, nature-friendly farming and so on.
But I suspect the Minister might say, 'Well, we don't have to bolt that down in this Bill, because we can do that; there are work streams going on outside this Bill'. And, in fact, in the discussion we had with Gemma and the Farmers Union of Wales, we talked there about the working groups that have been set up within these areas. So, can I just seek an assurance that, in terms of support for tenant farmers, for new entrants, for common land graziers—which is like Coity common, Coity Wallia and so on—which don't appear explicitly, either within this Bill or actually currently in the sustainable farming scheme proposals, you will encourage those groups to explore this properly, and when they bring forward their outputs towards the end of this year, that those things appear? Because we need them to be there—we need to say to young people coming into this, 'This is a life and a profession you want to come into, and you can make a good livelihood in it and we'll give you the opportunities.' So, I think those working groups are essential, Minister.

The Minister to respond.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Diolch, Llywydd, and I think Members for their contributions, and I'm very happy to support amendment 38, tabled in the name of Jane Dodds. Just to say to Sam Kurtz, on the way his amendment was drafted at Stage 2, it was rejected because I think the amendment didn't reflect the intent of the purpose. But it wasn't political; it was absolutely making sure that it did that. So, I'm very pleased it's on the face of the Bill.
I think the points that Jenny Rathbone made are very important, and, certainly, farmers I meet are very keen to have that innovation in relation to renewable energy on their land. I've seen hydro, I've seen solar, I've seen wind, and I think to have it on the face of the Bill is really important, going forward.
As I said in my opening comments, new entrants are captured in the way that the Bill is currently drafted. It is very important, of course, for the future of agriculture that new entrants are encouraged to come in, and you mentioned the work streams outside of this Bill, and, certainly, as we're bringing forward the sustainable farming scheme, we do have a new entrants work stream, we do have a tenants work stream. I've made it very clear that if it doesn't work for tenants, it will not work at all, this scheme, because so much of our farmland is farmed by tenant farmers. So, it is absolutely important, and common land as well. So, I can absolutely give you that assurance that those work streams are going on and those working groups are doing an incredible amount of work.
So, I would like to ask Members to support my Government amendment 4, Jane Dodds's non-Government amendment 38, and to not agree amendments 52, 53, 54 and 55, tabled in the name of Sam Kurtz. Diolch.

The first question, therefore, is that amendment 4 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No, there is no objection. Therefore, amendment 4 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Group 5: Sustainable Land Management Reporting (Amendments 40, 41)

The next group is group 5, and this group of amendments relates to sustainable land management reporting. The lead amendment in this group is amendment 40. I call on Mabon ap Gwynfor to move and speak to the lead amendment and the other amendments in the group.

Amendment 40 (Mabon ap Gwynfor) moved.

Mabon ap Gwynfor AS: Thank you, Llywydd, and I move amendments 40 and 41, which will have an impact on sections 5 and 7 of the Bill. I also want to state that, although we've already had the debate, we would be happy to support amendments tabled in the name of Samuel Kurtz and Jane Dodds.
Whilst the Bill as it currently stands includes the production of food and supporting the resilience of agricultural businesses, including their economic resilience, and the key part of that in the local economy, as clear objectives on the face of the Bill, and that's appropriate, of course, there is nothing that embeds those elements sufficiently in the rest of the framework of the Bill. The upshot of that is that there isn't sufficient assurance, as things stand, that there will be a requirement on Ministers to consider food production levels and farm income in setting targets and indicators to monitor that the SLM objectives are being met in accordance with the intention of the Bill. There was also concern by some about the practical impact of excluding this from the Bill on the need and demand for things such as the farm business survey, produced by IBERS in Aberystwyth University, and which is a valuable source of data that gives us a snapshot of the state of the agricultural sector—a sector that's crucial to jobs and the economy of rural Wales, and the whole of Wales, of course. The Welsh Government itself produces a number of publications, such as the 'Farming facts and figures', on an annual basis, and that is partly based on the work of the farm business survey.
It was the poet Dic Jones who said:
'While there is humanity there will be farming',
and mankind has to change if we are to safeguard our future and heritage, but we must do that in a just and balanced way. So, in line with the attempt to get that crucial balance between environmental, social, cultural and economic benefits running as a silver thread through the Bill, these amendments take us a step closer to ensuring that that is achieved. A well as ensuring accountability and transparency in terms of the state of the sector, and that the Bill's objectives are delivered holistically, it will give us a sign of the adequacy of our food supply. This will, in turn, lead to better policy and better collaboration between the agricultural sector and the different levels of government and policy developers. As a result of these amendments, publications of this kind will focus on food production levels and farm income—and I've referred to those already—and that will become a consideration, alongside the statutory reports on the state and health of the environment, as Ministers set targets, indicators and report against the Bill.
I would be very grateful if the Minister could confirm her commitment to these publications, as a way of meeting the duties that will be on Ministers in agreeing these amendments, and to consider these relevant issues and other issues. Thank you.

Samuel Kurtz MS: I'm grateful to both Plaid Cymru and the Welsh Government for tabling amendments 40 and 41 through their co-operation agreement. Indeed, I had very similar amendments at Stage 2, so I'm delighted once again that these have been picked up, because I think it's really important that there is no contradiction in wanting to improve productivity on our farms, and that going hand in hand with balancing our environmental sustainability. That goes hand in glove, and I think that's very important, and through these amendments we can ensure that agricultural productivity in Wales is where is needs to be. Diolch, Llywydd.

Jenny Rathbone AC: I want to speak to amendment 40, partly because I want to probe the Minister on exactly how all this monitoring and reporting that's going to go on is going to actually get us to the destination that we need to achieve if we're going to avoid climate catastrophe, because the biggest carbon emissions by individuals come from food, not flying on aeroplanes. That means everybody needs to be more mindful of the impact of the choices they make in what food they are consuming and the impact it may have had on the environment. Frankly, there is not nearly enough information available to people who don't spend their daily lives researching this, and we are going to need to educate people on the need to change diets in order for individuals not to be consuming so many carbon emissions because of their daily activity.
So, I want to understand how this amendment, and all the other proposals already on the face of the Bill, are actually going to track the improving impact of carbon reductions arising from agricultural activities, as outlined in sustainable land management. Now, I'm fully aware that many farmers are really thinking hard about this, and I'm very pleased to see Glyn Roberts, the president of the Farmers Union of Wales, in the gallery, because I know that he and his daughter have done a huge amount of work on improving their cattle stock, by reducing the amount of outputs in terms of costs—reducing the amount of time required to bring the cattle to a state where it's ready for market, which means they're having to buy less food and the life of the animal is generating less carbon. So, all that is really important, but not everybody is as well informed as Glyn Roberts and his family, and, therefore, we need to ensure that this Bill enables all farmers to make the right choices and have the tools they need to do that.
I recently was very interested to hear from a New Zealand parliamentarian about the work that their Government is doing to give farmers the tools, the training and the rewards of reducing their carbon emissions from their activities. That level of clarity about the change required means that Nestlé in New Zealand is investing in creating a carbon-neutral milking parlour. So, that's an indication of what can be done if we combine the science with the political will to tread more lightly on this land. And so I want to probe the Minister on how all these targets and reports are really going to ensure that everybody, including farmers, are clear about the journey that we all need to travel on.

Jane Dodds AS: Llywydd, I'm grateful to Mabon, and, of course, Sam, once again, for bringing these amendments, but particularly Mabon for amendments 40 and 41. And I'm grateful for the opportunity to put on record my support for these amendments. Again, it's an important part of our legislation, which rightly considers agricultural production, our natural environment and nature, and the contribution agriculture makes to our communities and our Welsh culture and language.
It's an important recognition that, whilst we must look forward, maintaining traditional ways of farming that have been an important part of our nation for generations, it's crucial also for keeping farmers farming. The central role of farmers is to produce food, and we have seen very clearly the impact that disruption to food and supply chains elsewhere has had on prices and the availability of food here in Wales and across the United Kingdom. Monitoring the impact of this legislation and associated policy and requirements on agricultural production and productivity, and the impact of agricultural businesses, is, I believe, essential. In addition, including this requirement to report and monitor against production and productivity on the face of the Bill strengthens the Bill, helps ensure that the Bill is delivering against its aims, and grounds us in the central role of farmers: caring for our environment and producing high-quality produce. I hope the Senedd can support these amendments. Diolch.

The Minister to contribute now to the debate. Lesley Griffiths.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Diolch, Llywydd. I'm pleased to support amendments 40 and 41. The amendments are the result of work done through the co-operation agreement. The amendments to section 5, and to section 7, make reference to the matters that the Welsh Ministers must have regard to when preparing or revising a statement of sustainable land management indicators and targets—section 5—and when preparing sustainable land management reports, section 7. These amendments alter section 5(2)(e) and section 7(d) to provide, in each case, that 'any other matters' include, amongst other things,
'any statistics published by the Welsh Ministers on agricultural production or the income of agricultural businesses, deriving from surveys of the sector',
the Welsh Ministers consider appropriate.
I do recognise the amendments are intended to be non-exhaustive examples of any other matters that the Welsh Ministers are required to have regard to, should they consider those matters to be appropriate, when preparing or revising a statement of sustainable land management indicators and targets or when preparing sustainable land management reports.
I was very interested to hear what Jenny Rathbone was saying about the idea in New Zealand, and I went out to New Zealand a few years ago now to have a look at agricultural practices there, and I think perhaps we could look to see—. They had managed to reduce the carbon emissions from the agricultural sector quite significantly in the previous decade, and I know our farmers themselves have done a huge amount of work, and it's an opportunity to say 'diolch yn fawr iawn' to Glyn Roberts, because, as you say, on his farm, some excellent work has been done to reduce carbon emissions.
A lot of targets and the indicators, obviously, that Jenny refers to will be in the sustainable farming scheme, and what the provisions of the Bill do seek to ensure is effective implementation and appropriate accountability and engagement with the agricultural sector to ensure that policy effectiveness is assessed and will form an important and developing evidence base for that ongoing policy development that will be required. The provisions that we do have in the Bill require that progress made against the SLM objectives is periodically reported on, and we looked very carefully, with Plaid Cymru, in those discussions, to see what the reporting period should be, and at the moment it's scheduled for every five years. So, there could be—. We looked at naming specific reports and documents, but, of course, in those five years, they could go out of production, and then Welsh Ministers would have to look at something that wasn't in existence anymore. So, I think it's very important to make sure, as I say, that it’s a non-exhaustive list, and the indicators and targets must be published and laid before the Senedd no later than December 2025.

Mabon ap Gwynfor to reply.

Mabon ap Gwynfor AS: Thank you very much, Llywydd. And thank you to the Minister for that response and for stating that the Government will support the amendments tabled in my name. This, of course, demonstrates how collaboration can strengthen legislation and can work for the benefit of the people of Wales, and thank you for that collaboration.
We will be voting on other amendments in this group, so I want to touch, very quickly, on the fact that I regret to hear that the Government won't support amendments 53 and 54, tabled in name of Samuel Kurtz, specifically to support new entrants to the industry. It's disappointing to hear this. Passing this amendment—. If some of you on the Labour benches could support it, it would tie in perfectly with well-being of future generations legislation to secure the future of the agricultural sector here in Wales.
Jane Dodds's amendment is one that will strengthen the Bill significantly. I myself in Meirionydd have seen how hydro systems on farms have kept families on the farm, have meant that young people have been able to go to university and come back, with that hydro system alone funding those young people's education. It ensures that it's possible to manage energy and that will keep people on the land and strengthen the rural economy. I've also seen that in Clwyd South, in Ken Skates's constituency, and he referred to that himself. I'd like to thank Sam Kurtz for his kind words, and Jane Dodds too, in supporting these amendments also.
Jenny asked earlier about the rationale behind monitoring. I would expect someone who wants to see nature strengthened, and the impact of this on the environment, to support monitoring, because it stands to reason that monitoring and keeping this data shows transparency and how public money and how public policy does contribute to the national life of Wales and ensures that nature is strengthened as a result of this work that is happening. So, it will be an important amendment to the Bill. Monitoring food production levels in Wales is crucial in order secure food security here. By keeping an eye on this, the Government can assess the quality and amount of food produced, meaning that they can be more agile in responding to problems or weaknesses in the food chain. In addition to this, monitoring agricultural production goes hand in hand with agricultural stewardship. Sustainable farming practices are becoming increasingly important in an age of awareness of the need to safeguard our environment. Data, therefore, will be crucial as we evolve our agricultural practices and develop new ways of producing food here. Jenny.

Jenny Rathbone AC: I absolutely agree with you that monitoring is essential, but the question I was posing was whether we were monitoring sufficiently the things that we need to monitor. We absolutely need to monitor the quantity of food we are producing, to ensure we have food security, but we also do need to ensure that we're producing our food whilst reducing our carbon emissions from food, and that is what I was questioning—just to clarify.

Mabon ap Gwynfor AS: Thank you for that clarification, and, of course, monitoring will not only look at food production but how the food is produced and the processes surrounding that, so, hopefully, that will answer that question.
So, to conclude, these amendments will significantly improve the Bill, which will lead to better policy and better collaboration between the agricultural sector and the various levels of Government and policy makers here in Wales. Support the amendments. Thank you.

The question is that amendment 40 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. So, amendment 40 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

The next question is about amendment 41. Is it being moved by Mabon ap Gwynfor?

Amendment 41 (Mabon ap Gwynfor) moved.

Yes, it is. The question is that amendment 41 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Therefore, amendment 41 is agreed as well.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 52. Is that being moved, Samuel Kurtz?

Amendment 52 (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

Yes, it is. The question is that amendment 52 to be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. Therefore, we will proceed to a vote on amendment 52. Open the vote. Close the vote. There are 26 in favour, no abstentions, 26 against. Therefore, once again, I will use my casting vote against that amendment. Amendment 52 is therefore not agreed by one vote, given that 26 are in favour and 27 are against.

Amendment 52: For: 26, Against: 26, Abstain: 0
As there was an equality of votes, the Llywydd used her casting vote in accordance with Standing Order 6.20(ii).
Amendment has been rejectedClick to see vote results

The next vote is on amendment 53. Is that being moved?

Amendment 53 (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

Yes, it is being moved by Samuel Kurtz. Is there any objection to amendment 53? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. Therefore, we will proceed to a vote on amendment 53. Open the vote. Close the vote. There are 26 in favour, 26 against, no abstentions. I use my casting vote against, and therefore amendment 53 is not agreed by 26 to 27 votes.

Amendment 53: For: 26, Against: 27, Abstain: 0
As there was an equality of votes, the Llywydd used her casting vote in accordance with Standing Order 6.20(ii).
Motion has been rejectedClick to see vote results

Amendment 54 is being moved by Samuel Kurtz.

Amendment 54 (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

The question is that amendment 54 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is an objection. Therefore, we will open the vote on amendment 54. Close the vote. There are 26 in favour, 26 against, therefore the vote is tied. I use my casting vote against the amendment, and therefore amendment 54 is not agreed by 26 votes to 27 against.

Amendment 54: For: 26, Against: 27, Abstain: 0
As there was an equality of votes, the Llywydd used her casting vote in accordance with Standing Order 6.20(ii).
Amendment has been rejectedClick to see vote results

Amendment 38 is next. Is it being moved by Jane Dodds?

Amendment 38 (Jane Dodds) moved.

Yes, it is. Is there any objection to amendment 38? No. Therefore, amendment 38 is agreed.

Motion agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 55 is next in the name of Samuel Kurtz.

Amendment 55 (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

It's being moved by Samuel Kurtz. Is there any objection to amendment 55? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. Therefore, we will open the vote on amendment 55. Close the vote. In favour 27, no abstentions, 25 against. And therefore amendment 55 is agreed.

Amendment 55: For: 27, Against: 25, Abstain: 0
Amendment has been agreedClick to see vote results

Group 6: Multi-annual Support Plans (Amendment 42)

Group 6 is the next group of amendments. This group relates to multi-annual support plans. The lead and only amendment in this group is amendment 42, and I call on Mabon ap Gwynfor to move amendment 42. Mabon ap Gwynfor.

Amendment 42 (Mabon ap Gwynfor) moved.

Mabon ap Gwynfor AS: Thank you, Llywydd. I move amendment 42 formally.
Of course, some say that it's difficult for the Government here in Wales to give financial assurance in advance as the Government doesn't know what settlement it will get from Westminster from one year to the next. But let's be clear here that the principle has already been accepted by Government, and they do give multi-year estimates to other organisations—take local authorities as the main example. So, there is no barrier to prevent this from happening in agriculture. A multi-annual support plan would give a summary of all support programmes that are implemented or expected to be implemented during the period of the plan, such as the sustainable farming scheme.
Of course, agriculture isn't an ad hoc sector, but it's a sector that has to be planned years in advance. Knowing what field needs to be ploughed in order to be seeded; what field needs fertiliser in order to develop to produce forage land; should we have more or less cattle on the land; where the sheep should be grazed; what seeds need to be planted, and much more, are decisions that need to be made years in advance. And in order to implement those decisions, then you must invest and put hours of hard work into the preparatory work.
But, although agriculture is not an ad hoc sector, it is impacted by events way beyond its control. Consider the recent impact of the terrible Russian war in Ukraine on farming in Wales, and this example, and how this has influenced the input cost to farmers, as a perfect example of how the sector is impacted by issues beyond its control. In the open market, businesses have to respond to these elements, with some coming and some going. But agriculture isn't just any sector. Agriculture is crucial in producing food—one of the necessities of life—and therefore, they need support in order to ensure that they can continue to produce quality nutritious food. And that's why we need a multi-year plan. This amendment would significantly strengthen the Bill, enabling farmers to prepare five years in advance, giving an assurance to the supply chain too, as well as assurances to us who purchase the food. I urge Members here, therefore, to support the amendment. Thank you.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Once again, this is an amendment very similar to one of mine, brought forward at Stage 2, and I'm delighted that Mabon has brought it forward today. He's eloquently explained why the need for multi-annual support plans is absolutely necessary, and I do wish to stress the importance of this in terms of bringing Welsh agriculture in line with our English counterparts across Offa's Dyke, in terms of giving security in long-term planning. The multi-annual support plan will deliver that. Diolch, Llywydd.

Jane Dodds AS: Thank you to Mabon for moving this amendment. A long-term multi-annual commitment to funding is needed, that sets out the direction of travel over the funding period, and sets out exactly how the funding package will reflect the ambition of the legislation, and ensure that inflationary pressures on agricultural businesses are tackled. The legislation asks agricultural businesses to innovate, to collaborate, and to continually adopt new ways of working. Much of this is now using data and science. This will require certainty from Government that it will support, not only the transition to new ways of farming, but will, long term, support an environment that enables these businesses to be more resilient, innovative and economically sustainable. I therefore believe that this amendment is very much in keeping with the spirit of the legislation, in setting out a strong foundation to keep farmers on our land for generations to come. I very much hope this amendment will be supported by the Senedd today. Diolch.

The Minister.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Diolch, Llywydd. I'm pleased to support amendment 42, which has been brought forward in collaboration with Plaid Cymru through the co-operation agreement. It does reflect the proposed amendment that was made by Sam Kurtz at Stage 2, but I think what Sam did at Stage 2 was effectively to copy section 4 of the UK Government's Agriculture Act 2020, and during the ETRA committee Stage 2 closing debate I did inform the committee that I would bring forward a Welsh-focused provision for the multi-annual support plan. I know that you subsequently did withdraw that amendment.
It is absolutely essential—Sam Kurtz is right—that we provide our agricultural sector with the confidence, assurance and transparency of the Welsh Government's intentions to provide support to the agricultural industry in Wales, but it's also completely correct, as pointed out by Mabon ap Gwynfor, that we don't know what our budget will be. So, the multi-annual support plan will outline how Welsh Ministers intend to provide support during the period of each multi-annual support plan that best contributes to achieving the sustainable land management objectives and also provides details on the planned and operationally active support schemes within each plan period. This will provide the sector and its businesses with the opportunity to effectively plan ahead in five-yearly cycles.

Mabon ap Gwynfor to reply.

Mabon ap Gwynfor AS: Thank you, Llywydd. Very briefly, once again, as the Minister said, this demonstrates the value of the co-operation agreement between the Government and Plaid Cymru. This strengthens the Bill for the benefit of farmers and the communities of Wales.
Samuel Kurtz, Jane Dodds and the Minister have perfectly summed up why we should support the amendment, so I look forward to seeing this amendment being passed. Thank you.

The question is that amendment 42 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No, there is no objection. Therefore, amendment 42 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Group 7: Intervention in Agricultural Markets—Input Costs (Amendments 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62)

Group 7 is the next group of amendments, and this group relates to intervention in agricultural markets and input costs. The lead amendment in this group is amendment 56, and I call on Samuel Kurtz to move and speak to the lead amendment and the other amendments in the group. Samuel Kurtz.

Amendment 56 (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd. I wish to move all amendments in this group being tabled under my name, but due to the nature of these amendments, I will be discussing them as one, Llywydd.
These amendments have been laid in order to support the agricultural industry should there be a significant or dramatic change in input costs. The last 24 months have unfortunately been a perfect example of why these changes are so necessary. Post-COVID supply chain constraints and the war in Ukraine have driven up the costs of the three Fs, as the Minister refers to them: feed, fuel and fertiliser. This has caused huge difficulties in the agricultural sector.
Now, these amendments seek to ensure that, should a situation such as this occur again, resulting in a negative impact on market conditions, then the Welsh Government has the necessary tools at its disposal to alleviate any difficulties through support, ensuring that the day-to-day production of food can continue. By supporting these amendments we also seek to enhance our food security and sovereignty by safeguarding the agricultural community from unprecedented events and changes. Therefore, it is with this that I encourage Members—all Members—to support these amendments this evening. Diolch, Llywydd.

Mabon ap Gwynfor AS: You'll recall in my previous contribution, in discussing the multi-annual settlement, about the way that farmers have to respond to major international, environmental and economic events that are beyond their control. I used the war in Ukraine as an example. Consider the fact that the cost of fertiliser went up fourfold in a few months as a result of the war back last year. The cost of fuel can transform the ability of farmers to produce, or a very dry summer or a very wet winter can have a detrimental impact on the ability to produce food, leading to an increase in input costs.
We shouldn't forget the role of farmers in safeguarding rural areas. If a farmer were to cease farming overnight then I can assure you the upshot of that wouldn't be rewilding, but rather it would lead to a monoculture of just a few species of grasses and ferns, which wouldn't support the diversity of insects that we need for nature recovery, and would in turn lead to a decline in the diversity of birds and wildlife. We must guard against this, therefore.
The purpose of these amendments, tabled in the name of Samuel Kurtz, is to safeguard our farmers, the producers of the food that we are so reliant on, from unexpected increases in input costs for agriculture. That's why we'll be supporting these amendments, in understanding that, if implemented, they will secure the sector and everything dependent on the agricultural sector.

The Minister.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Diolch, Llywydd. The amendments in this group allow for high agricultural input costs to count as a form of exceptional market conditions and allow financial support to be granted to farmers under section 21. Similar amendments were tabled and not agreed at Stage 2. As I stated during Stage 2, input costs for agriculture are already considered by the UK agriculture market monitoring group. As agreed by Ministers in the provisional framework for agricultural support, the Governments of the UK share information and analyse and co-ordinate evidence on the impact of market developments across the UK through the group. These discussions take into account the range of pressures that affect the different agricultural sectors. These include geospatial, input costs and commodity prices for goods within the supply chain. The current scope of powers to intervene in exceptional market conditions aligns with other parts of the UK. To diverge would likely have unintended consequences for the UK internal market, the subsidy control regime and farmers in Wales. This is a consequence, I'm sure, we all wish to avoid. Diolch.

Samuel Kurtz to reply to the debate.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Diolch, Llywydd.I'm grateful to Mabon ap Gwynfor for speaking in support of this amendment. I think the last 24 months, as we've both discussed here this evening, have given a prime example of why this specific support is necessary—exceptional market conditions, not just at the output end but at the input end as well. It's imperative that farmers are given the support, when necessary. I'm understanding of the Minister's response, but do find it disappointing that the Government won't be supporting the amendment. Diolch, Llywydd.

The question is that amendment 56 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. Therefore, we will proceed to a vote on amendment 56. Open the vote. Close the vote. The vote is tied, therefore, I use my casting vote against amendment 56. Therefore, the outcome of the vote is 26 in favour, 27 against and no abstentions. Amendment 56 is not agreed.

Amendment 56: For: 26, Against: 26, Abstain: 0
As there was an equality of votes, the Chair used her casting vote in accordance with Standing Order 6.20(ii).
Amendment has been rejectedClick to see vote results

Amendment 57—is that being moved, Samuel Kurtz?

Amendment 57 (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Move.

Yes it is. The question is that amendment 57 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. Therefore, we will proceed to a vote on amendment 57. Open the vote. Close the vote. The vote is tied, therefore I use my casting vote against amendment 57, which means that amendment 57 is not agreed by 27 votes against 26. Therefore, amendment 57 is not agreed.

Amendment 57: For: 26, Against: 26, Abstain: 0
As there was an equality of votes, the Chair used her casting vote in accordance with Standing Order 6.20(ii).
Amendment has been rejectedClick to see vote results

Amendment 58—is it being moved?

Amendment 58 (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Move.

Yes. Is there objection? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. Therefore, amendment 58, let's proceed to a vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. I use my casting vote against amendment 58. Amendment 58 is not agreed, with 26 in favour and 27 against.

Amendment 58: For: 26, Against: 26, Abstain: 0
As there was an equality of votes, the Chair used her casting vote in accordance with Standing Order 6.20(ii).
Amendment has been rejectedClick to see vote results

Amendment 59. Is that being moved?

Amendment 59 (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Move.

Yes. Is there objection? [Objection.] There is objection. Therefore, we will proceed to a vote on amendment 59. Open the vote. Close the vote. The vote is tied, therefore I will use my casting vote against amendment 59. Amendment 59 is not agreed, with 26 votes in favour and 27 against.

Amendment 59: For: 26, Against: 26, Abstain: 0
As there was an equality of votes, the Chair used her casting vote in accordance with Standing Order 6.20(ii).
Amendment has been rejectedClick to see vote results

Amendment 60—is that moved, Samuel Kurtz?

Amendment 60 (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Move.

Yes, it is. Is there objection? [Objection.] Yes, there is. Therefore, let's have a vote on amendment 60. Open the vote. Close the vote. The vote is tied. Therefore, I will use my casting vote against amendment 60. Amendment 60 is not agreed, with 26 in favour and 27 against.

Amendment 60: For: 26, Against: 26, Abstain: 0
As there was an equality of votes, the Chair used her casting vote in accordance with Standing Order 6.20(ii).
Amendment has been rejectedClick to see vote results

Amendment 61 is next. Is it moved?

Amendment 61 (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

Yes, it is by Samuel Kurtz. Is there objection? [Objection.] Yes, there's objection. Therefore, open the vote on amendment 61. The vote is tied, therefore I use my casting vote against amendment 61. Amendment 61 is not agreed with 26 in favour, 27 against.

Amendment 61: For: 26, Against: 26, Abstain: 0
As there was an equality of votes, the Llywydd used her casting vote in accordance with Standing Order 6.20(ii).
Amendment has been rejectedClick to see vote results

Amendment 62. Is that moved, Samuel Kurtz?

Amendment 62 (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

Yes, it is. Is there objection? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. Open the vote on amendment 62. The vote is tied. Therefore, I'll use my casting vote against amendment 62. Amendment 62 is not agreed, with 26 votes in favour, 27 against.

Amendment 62: For: 26, Against: 26, Abstain: 0
As there was an equality of votes, the Llywydd used her casting vote in accordance with Standing Order 6.20(ii).
Amendment has been rejectedClick to see vote results

Group 8: Agricultural Tenancies (Amendments 63, 5A, 5, 64, 65, 37)

Group 8 is the next group of amendments, and these relate to agricultural tenancies. The lead amendment in this group is amendment 63, and I call on Samuel Kurtz to move and speak tothe lead amendment and the other amendments in the group.

Amendment 63 (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Diolch, Llywydd. I wish to move all amendments in this group table under my name. Speaking to amendment 5, the inclusion of this change is a welcome step in the right direction by the Welsh Government. The Minister will recall that the introduction of this amendment follows a previous amendment that I submitted at Stage 2, so I am pleased to see that being brought forward today.
Amendment 5A is an attempt to strengthen this change, however. Whilst the Government's amendment operates when the tenant needs consent as per an agreed tenancy agreement, it will not operate if the need for consent is not due to factors contained within the tenancy agreement. Amendment 5A will correct for that, as it provides a catch-all provision for any circumstances within which the landlord's consent might be required. Amendment 5A remains fully in line with the public policy purpose of this Government's initial amendment, and I would therefore hope that there would be no difficulty in accepting it.
The same is true for amendment 63, which seeks to amend the pre-existing provision relating to a tenant's ability to object to a landlord's unreasonable refusal under the Agricultural Holdings Act 1986. It seeks to apply the same catch-all provision in similar terms to that contained within amendment 5A, noted above, for the farm business tenancy agreements.
Amendments 64 and 65, their purpose is to directly align the definition of 'agriculture' contained within this Bill to the definitions that apply to agricultural tenancies related to both the Agricultural Holdings Act 1986 and the Agricultural Tenancies Act 1995. By seeking out these changes, we ensure uniformity across the board for the benefit of Wales's tenant farmers.
Briefly touching upon amendment 37, tabled by the Welsh Government, I'm happy to confirm that this slight change of wording will be supported. Diolch, Llywydd.

Jane Dodds AS: Thank you, again, to Sam Kurtz for moving these amendments. Currently, around 30 per cent of total land farmed in Wales is rented, and if this once-in-a-generation legislation fails to recognise that, then this legislation will fail to work for Wales. I believe it is of vital importance that we not only ensure that tenant farmers are able to access the support available under the legislation, but that, by doing so, we can encourage more people to start agricultural activity.
I welcome the acknowledgement from the Government via the amendments tabled that further safeguards are needed to ensure that tenants can formally object to any unreasonable refusal to allow access to financial support or compliance with statutory duties. I will be supporting the amendments tabled by Sam Kurtz insofar as they provide protection for tenant farmers who find themselves in a situation where consent is not forthcoming from their landlords due to design of the legislation and subsequent schemes themselves, rather than from within the tenancy agreements.
This is my last contribution to this debate, and the Welsh Liberal Democrats are pleased to support this agriculture Bill. For the residents of Mid and West Wales, whom I represent, with three national parks, Parc Cenedlaethol Arfordir Penfro, Eryri and Bannau Brycheiniog, with, it's reckoned, around four times more sheep than people, it has been an honour and a privilege to take part in this debate this evening. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

The Minister.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Diolch, Llywydd. Amendment63, tabled in the name of Sam Kurtz. The purpose of the amendment is to broaden the scope of the current provisions amending the Agricultural Holdings Act 1986. Currently, the power to refer a dispute to arbitration only applies where consent is required under the terms of the lease or a variation of the lease. However, the amendment seeks to broaden the scope of the power to enable a tenant to request arbitration relating to any matter where the tenant may need the landlord's consent. The current provision has been drafted carefully to ensure fairness to both the tenant and the landlord. I would like to remind Members a similar amendment was tabled at Stage 2, and resisted on the basis it would extend the provisions to a much wider range of unknown circumstances and could have unintended consequences.
Amendments 5 and 37, tabled in my name. During the Stage 2 committee, I promised to consider an amendment to the Bill to ensure farm business tenancy tenants have access to similar dispute resolution mechanisms to those we are introducing for 1986 Act tenants. As Jane Dodds said, tenanted land makes up a significant portion of farmland in Wales and ensuring tenants have fair access to financial support schemes delivered pursuant to powers contained within the Bill is vital to ensuring a flourishing and successful tenancy sector in Wales. So, I'm pleased to introduce amendment 5, which increases the current circumstances in which tenants may refer requests for consent or variation to arbitration under the 1995 Act. The amendment will seek to ensure as many tenant farmers, as well as farm owners, as possible can apply to a scheme, such as the sustainable farming scheme, established under the power to provide support and place farm business tenancy tenants in a similar position to tenants who hold tenancies under the Agricultural Holdings Act 1986. This important amendment aims to maximise delivery of the Bill's environmental, social, economic and cultural objectives, and is the outcome of successful engagement with stakeholders, such as the Tenant Farmers Association and sustainable farming scheme working groups that I referred to earlier.
Amendment 37 is a consequence of the drafting of the 1995 Act amendment, and will ensure the new provisions in both the 1995 Act and the 1986 Act can commence simultaneously by Order.
Amendment 5A, tabled in the name of Sam Kurtz, seeks to amend amendment 5, which I've just raised, by broadening the scope of the situations in which a tenant may request arbitration to any matter where the tenant may need the landlord's consent. As I previously said, the Government amendment 5 has been drafted to ensure fairness to both the tenant and the landlord. Broadening the amendment in this way would extend the scope to a wider range of circumstances and could have unintended consequences.
Amendments 64 and 65 seek to update the definitions of 'agriculture' in the 1986 Act and the 1995 Act respectively. Seeking to amend definitions in older Acts can have unintended consequences. A full review would be required and a public consultation would be required to ensure that no such consequences arose. We do not believe an amendment of this nature is necessary at this time, given the definitions in both the 1986 and the 1995 Acts are non-exhaustive. Furthermore, the proposed dispute resolution provisions will assist those tenants whose agreements contain user clauses restricting their abilities to take part in future schemes.

Samuel Kurtz to reply.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd. I'm grateful to the Minister for her response and to Jane Dodds for her support. And can I also put on record my thanks to George Dunn, on behalf of the Tenant Farmers Association, for his work in drafting and working with me and my office on these amendments? I think it's imperative that if we are to deliver the sustainable farming scheme objectives, as many tenant farmers as possible are able to sign up to these schemes. I think the work that George has done through my office, through the working groups that the Minister has outlined, is testament to his devotion to tenant farmers in Wales, and I think that's imperative, but I would urge the Minister and the Government to support these amendments to ensure no tenant farmer is left behind. Diolch, Llywydd.

The question is that amendment 63 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection. We will therefore move to a vote on amendment 63. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 15, no abstentions, 37 against. Therefore, amendment 63 is not agreed.

Amendment 63: For: 15, Against: 37, Abstain: 0
Amendment has been rejectedClick to see vote results

Before we dispose of amendment 5, we need to dispose of the amendment to amendment 5, which is amendment 5A in the name of Samuel Kurtz.

Amendment 5A (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

That is moved. The question is that amendment 5A be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection. We will therefore move to a vote on amendment 5A. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 15, no abstentions, 37 against. Therefore, amendment 5A is not agreed.

Amendment 5A: For: 15, Against: 37, Abstain: 0
Amendment has been rejectedClick to see vote results

Amendment 5—is it being moved, Minister?

Amendment 5 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Formally.

It is. The question is that amendment 5 be agreed. Does any Member object? There is no objection. Therefore, amendment 5 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 64—is it moved, Samuel Kurtz?

Amendment 64 (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Yes.

It is. The question is: is there an objection to amendment 64? [Objection.] There is. We will therefore move to a vote on amendment 64. Open the vote. Close the vote. The vote is tied, therefore, I will use my casting vote against amendment 64, and amendment 64 is therefore not agreed, by 26 in favour and 27 against.

Amendment 64: For: 26, Against: 26, Abstain: 0
As there was an equality of votes, the Llywydd used her casting vote in accordance with Standing Order 6.20(ii).
Amendment has been rejectedClick to see vote results

Amendment 65 is next. Is it moved?

Amendment 65 (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

It is. Are there any objections? [Objection.] There are objections. We will therefore vote on amendment 65. Open the vote. Close the vote. The vote is tied. I will therefore use my casting vote against amendment 65. The result is 26 in favour, 27 against. Amendment 65 is not agreed.

Amendment 65: For: 26, Against: 26, Abstain: 0
As there was an equality of votes, the Llywydd used her casting vote in accordance with Standing Order 6.20(ii).
Amendment has been rejectedClick to see vote results

Group 9: Collection and Sharing of Data (Amendment 47)

We move now to group 9. The ninth group of amendments relates to the collection and sharing of data. The lead amendment is amendment 47, and I call on the Minister to move and speak to the amendment.

Amendment 47 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Thank you, Llywydd. I'm pleased to introduce amendment 47, tabled in my name. This amendment is in line with recommendation 24 of the Economy, Transport and Rural Affairs Committee report and requires Welsh Ministers to produce a report on the operations of the data collection regime within sections 24 to 31 of the Bill every five years. The review will provide an additional level of transparency and assurance of the operation of the data collection provisions over a reporting period of a successive five years. This applies to all data being collected from across the sector, pursuant to the provisions of the Bill.
Following discussions with committee members, Sarah Murphy and Sam Kurtz during the Stage 2 committee, I've extended this amendment from a one-off five-year review to now capturing successive five-yearly reviews. This will provide ongoing transparency and assurance to the sector and to Senedd Members of the Government's use of the data collection provisions. Diolch.

I have no speakers to this group, so, I assume that the Minister doesn't wish to respond.
The question is that amendment 47 be agreed to. Does any Member object? There are no objections. Therefore, amendment 47 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

I have received a request that we take a five-minute break. I will agree to that request. We have a fair few votes to get through and those votes are very close. So, we will break for five minutes.

Plenary was suspended at 19:03.
The Senedd reconvened at 19:13, with the Llywydd in the Chair.

Group 10: Forestry (Amendments 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34)

[Inaudible.]—and I call on the Minister to move the amendment and to speak to the other amendments in the group.

Amendment 7 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Diolch, Llywydd. Amendments 7 to 34, as tabled in my name, are necessary amendments to Part 4 of the Bill, relating to forestry. I've been transparent in my intention to introduce such amendments, having written back to all Members in March, ahead of Stage 2, to signify that such Government amendments would be laid at Stage 3. I would like to be clear that the amendments proposed here today, although extensive, do not alter the policy intention behind the forestry provisions as introduced. They build on the original provisions to deal with the wide range of circumstances that may arise due to the powers already set out at Stage 1.
The Forestry Act 1967 is a consolidation of 1930s legislation, made at a time when land ownership and transfer of land operated significantly differently from how it does now. This, together with the terminology used in the 1967 Act, has given rise to difficulties in the drafting and interpretation of the forestry provisions as introduced at Stage 1. In particular, the 1967 Act does not expressly provide for the transfer of felling licences, and this alone creates numerous drafting issues when dealing with enforcement notices arising from the new provisions. For example, ensuring that a notice requiring action to be taken in relation to a licence is issued to the correct person, as well as allowing the correct person to have rights of appeal and a right to compensation.
These amendments are a consequence of the interaction between theforestry provisions as introduced with existing provisions of the 1967 Act, into which the Part 4 provisions will be inserted. The amendments are necessary to ensure the desired policy outcome of the forestry provisions is achieved fairly, whilst providing accessibility to the law for the reader.The amendments focus on the interaction of the forestry provisions with tree preservation orders, provision for the serving of a notice on a subsequent owner of land, and further provision relating to rights of appeal and compensation. This has resulted in the extensive but important amendments proposed today. These ensure the numerous scenarios arising from the new forestry provisions function as intended when interacting with those existing provisions of the 1967 Act. These amendments do not change the scope and policy intention of provisions as introduced, which is to better protect wildlife and limit environmental harm during felling operations.

I have no other speakers and I assume that the Minister doesn't wish to reply. The question is that amendment 7 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Amendment 7 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 8 is next. Is it moved by the Minister?

Amendment 8 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Moved.

It is. Is there any objection to amendment 8? There is not. Amendment 8 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Is amendment 9 moved?

Amendment 9 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Formally.

It is moved. Any objections to amendment 9? No. Therefore, amendment 9 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 10.

Amendment 10 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Formally.

It's been moved. Any objections? No. Amendment 10 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 11.

Amendment 11 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Formally.

Any objections to amendment 11? No. Amendment 11 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 12. Is it moved?

Amendment 12 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Formally.

It is. Any objections to amendment 12? No. Therefore, amendment 12 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 13. Is it moved?

Amendment 13 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Formally.

It is. Are there any objections to amendment 13? No. So, amendment 13 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 14. Is it moved?

Amendment 14 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Formally.

It is. Any objections to amendment 14? No. There are no objections. Amendment 14 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

I'm starting to feel like a livestock auctioneer here. [Laughter.] Very relevant to the debate.

Amendment 15. Is it moved?

Amendment 15 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Formally.

It is. The question is that amendment 15 be agreed to? Does any Member object? No. Therefore, amendment 15 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 16. Is it moved?

Amendment 16 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Formally.

It's formally moved. Any objections? No. Therefore, amendment 16 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 17. Is it moved?

Amendment 17 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Formally.

It is mover. Are there any objection? There are none. Therefore, amendment 17 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 18. Is it moved?

Amendment 18 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Formally.

It is. Any objections to amendment 18? There are none. Therefore, amendment 18 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 19—

Amendment 19 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Formally.

Yes, that's the one.

The question is that amendment 19 be agreed. There are no objections. Therefore, amendment 19 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 20. Is it moved?

Amendment 20 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Formally.

It is. Any objections to amendment 20? No. Therefore, amendment 20 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 21. Is it moved?

Amendment 21 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Formally.

It is. Any objections? No. Therefore, amendment 21 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 22. Is it moved?

Amendment 22 (Lesley Griffiths)moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Formally.

It is. Any objections? No. Therefore, amendment 22 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 23. Is it moved?

Amendment 23 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Formally.

It is. Any objections to amendment 23? No. Therefore, amendment 23 is agreed.

Amendment in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 24. Is it moved?

Amendment 24 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Formally.

It is. Any objections to amendment 24? No. Therefore, the amendment is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 25. Is it moved?

Amendment 25 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Formally.

It is. Any objections to amendment 25? No. Therefore, amendment 25 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 26. Is it moved?

Amendment 26 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Formally.

It is. No objections? No. Therefore, amendment 26 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 27 is next. Is it moved?

Amendment 27 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Formally.

It is. Any objections to amendment 27? No. Amendment 27 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 28. Is it moved?

Amendment 28 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Formally.

It is. Any objections to amendment 28? No, no objections. Therefore, the amendment is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 29. Is itmoved?

Amendment 29 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Formally.

It is. Any objections? No objections. So, amendment 29 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 30. Is it moved?

Amendment 30 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Formally.

It is. Any objections? No. Therefore, amendment 30 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 31.

Amendment 31 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Formally.

It's moved. Any objections? No objections. Therefore, amendment 31 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 32. Is it moved?

Amendment 32 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Formally.

It is. Any objections to amendment 32? No. Amendment 32 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 33 is next. Is it moved?

Amendment 33 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Formally.

Yes. Any objections to amendment 33? No. Therefore, amendment 33 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 34. Is it moved?

Amendment 34 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Formally.

It is. Any objections to amendment 34? No. Therefore, amendment 34 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Group 11: Wildlife—use of snares (Amendments 44, 45, 46, 43)

Group 11 is next, wildlife—use of snares. Amendment 44 is the lead amendment, and I call on Samuel Kurtz to move the amendment.

Amendment 44 (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. I hope the goodwill from the previous set of amendments carries through to group 11 here, and I would like to move and speak to all these amendments within this group. Rather than speak to each one individually, I'll seek to provide an overview of the entire grouping, as all four amendments have been proposed for the same purpose: to protect biodiversity and species restoration. Firstly, for clarity, I and the Welsh Conservatives support the ban of non-code-compliant snares. Secondly, amendments 44, 45, 46 a 43 have been tabled for one purpose, and that's to severely and tightly regulate the use and purchase of code-compliant humane cable restraints within an extremely narrow scope. This will ensure that code-compliant humane cable restraints can be deployed only in specific areas of conservation for a specific species alone. Indeed, I think we all recognise that the current unregulated system currently allows the use of dangerous and outdated non-code-compliant snares, a system that undoubtedly risks animal health in a way that is contrary to what we all seek to achieve.
During Stage 1 of the legislation's progress, the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee heard first hand from industry representatives about the value of deploying humane cable restraints, especially within the context of successful apex predator control in the restoration of ground-nesting birds as just one example. This is a system that works, and it is one that has been proven successful. The Welsh Government have accepted that there is a need for these code-compliant humane cable restraints previously, and so we need to be explicit that this isn't about permitting the ancient and unregulated use of snares; these amendments are to offer a tight-knit, regulated system in which only code-compliant humane cable restraints are used solely for the restoration and conservation of endangered species that would undoubtedly be under threat by predation. It's with that that I would urge Members to consider the wider ramifications that a wholesale ban of humane cable restraints would have on biodiversity and the species we wish to restore. Diolch, Llywydd.

Vikki Howells AC: It's a pleasure to be able to contribute to the Stage 3 proceedings of this Bill today. I've long been a proponent of banning snares and have made the case for this on many occasions, not least as the UK is one of the few countries in Europe that still permits snaring. So, I'm delighted that the Welsh Government has taken forward proposals to change this under the Agriculture (Wales) Bill. I'd like to thank the Minister and her team for all their work on this, and also pay tribute to all the organisations who have campaigned tirelessly to ban completely the use of snares in Wales. I'm sure we all have many constituents who have written to us so passionately on this issue, supporting the full banning of snares.
I'm also really pleased to have been able to play a part in developing this proposal, not least through serving on the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee, and the evidence that has been presented to our committee throughout the process has been clear and unequivocal. Snares are cruel, vicious, indiscriminate. They maim and inflict horrific injuries, and their use can be lethal. And these animal welfare points are made not just by charities or campaigning organisations, but also by the body representing vets. Moreover, as research commissioned by DEFRA established, seven out of 10 animals caught are not the intended target. Rather, they can be domestic animals, farm animals, protected species, including those covered under section 7 priority of the environment Act, which we have a duty to protect. Members will have received a briefing from the RSPCA noting their inspectors have responded to 12 incidents involving five snares in Wales since 2020. All concerned domestic or non-target animals, including protected species, such as badgers. So, it's good that that this Bill will outlaw these barbaric and brutal devices, which brings me to the amendments in group 11.
I am disappointed to see this further attempt to water down this section of the Bill by proposing an exception for so-called humane cable restraints. The evidence given to the committee was clear: there is nothing humane about snaring. Rather, this is just a euphemism, a loophole to circumvent the ban on snaring. Similarly, we have a rigorous body of evidence that licensing doesn't work. If we permit the so-called humane cable restraints, under licence or not, all we will see is the same disturbing pattern. These cruel and vicious devices do not contribute to conservation attempts, and, as the species champion for the nightjar, which is a ground-nesting bird, I've done plenty of research on this, and I do not believe there is any evidence to support the use of snares in conservation. I'll be voting against this attempt to water down these provisions, and in favour of a full ban on snaring, in favour of ending the use of devices that have no basis for their use in a modern, civilised society, and in favour of ensuring we continue to uphold and prioritise the very highest animal welfare standards here in Wales. Diolch.

Mark Isherwood AC: Nature is in crisis across Wales and we must tackle biodiversity loss. The state of nature report 2019 found that one in six species in Wales are threatened with extinction. The 'Review of the wider societal, biodiversity and ecosystem benefits of curlew recovery and applicability to Wales' report, commissioned by Natural Resources Wales, states that the papers provided a diverse array of evidence showing that curlew recovery would benefit multiple species—we're talking around 70 species both directly and indirectly underpinning our understanding of curlew as an indicator species. A quid pro quo of that is, if we lose the population, up to 70 species could be lost or damaged also.
Curlew is the UK's highest conservation priority bird species, forecast to be extinct as a breeding population in Wales within a decade without intervention. Some of the expert bodies say that that could be reduced to five years without humane cable restraints being one of the tools optionally available under a licensed scheme. Working with Glyfinir Cymru/Curlew Wales, a broad partnership of organisations committed to preventing the extinction of curlew in Wales, some of whom support this and some of whom who don't, I've learnt that the predation of nests and chicks by apex predators is a primary cause of breeding failure. I visited curlew recovery projects run by conservation charities trialling various interventions, and I have seen that breeding recovery is dependent upon a package of measures to both address habitat quality and influence predation. I've also been shown humane cable restraints and briefed on how they differ from a traditional snare on the research-led design and on the adoption of good operating practices through training.
Nest camera data showing nest predation, which I have viewed, is unequivocal. The management of Wales's apex predators is vital to the conservation of ground-nesting species, including the curlew. The snares of yesteryear are not acceptable, but this serious problem must have a serious solution. The vast majority of people in Wales want action to tackle the nature emergency, but we face a stark choice: extinction of multiple further species or a range of urgent intervention measures to reverse biodiversity loss. Only a highly regulated and licensed use of code-compliant humane cable restraints in species restoration projects will enable that full range of urgent intervention measures to be available. I'd even go as far as to say that to oppose this questions the sincerity of those who say they want to back all measures to tackle the nature emergency. Thank you.

John Griffiths AC: I would like to speak against amendments 43 to 46, despite what Sam Kurtz has said during this debate, and I'd very much like to agree with the very effective points made by my colleague Vikki Howells. I think we all know that conservation projects can be taken forward and are taken forward without the use of these so-called humane restraints, and many countries, European countries included, have a total ban on snares and have many successful conservation projects. So, I simply do not accept that conservation projects require the use of these so-called humane cable restraints. A body of evidence has been built up over a number of years to justify the ban on all snares, and I think the legislative process for this Bill, up to this stage, has also made the case quite effectively. It's very clear, isn't it, that trapping, restraining, living creatures in this way by any snare at all is very, very cruel indeed and does cause a great deal of suffering. And of course, as Vikki said, it doesn't just capture the animals that it's intended to capture; it captures many others instead, including, of course, domestic pets. So, I think the case is absolutely unanswerable. We need to ban all snares, and that's what these amendments would not allow, and that's why they should be opposed.

Lesley Griffiths AC: The amendments in this group, as tabled by Sam Kurtz, aim to introduce the licensed use of cable restraints. To be very clear, a so-called humane cable restraint and a code-compliant snare are identical in every way, and have been in use since 2012. I'd like to remind Members that such amendments were proposed during Stage 2 of the Bill and were not accepted. And furthermore, a clear majority of Members supported the ban on the use of snares in the ETRA committee Stage 1 report.
Officials have considered a regulated licensing system, as laid out in the explanatory memorandum. It was determined, however, that regulation of this kind would be unable to meet the primary objective, to raise animal welfare standards, due to the indiscriminate nature of snares, including cable restraints, and the suffering they can cause to a wide range of species. A large proportion of captures in any snare or cable restraint are non-target wild animals such as badgers, deer, hares and livestock, as well as pet cats and dogs. My position remains unchanged from Stage 2: snares, whether they be code compliant—referred to in this amendment as 'humane cable restraints'—or not, are incompatible with the high standards of animal welfare that we strive for in Wales. They are inherently inhumane for both target and non-target species.
I'd like to thank Members for their contributions: Vikki Howells, who has long advocated on this very important step for animal welfare here in Wales, and John Griffiths. Mark Isherwood referred to curlews, and the use of snares to protect curlews from fox predation has been discussed endlessly with NRW specialists and also those who carry out fox control, and the most efficient method of fox control is the use of rifles with thermal-image scopes at night, particularly during the winter and early spring, while vegetation is lower and, of course, before nesting begins. A holistic approach to protecting all ground-nesting birds from predators is necessary, and any intervention needs to be considered in relation to the balance of the whole system of wildlife and habitats likely to be affected. Protecting ground-nesting birds or other animals should consider habitat management or enhancement, the use of barriers such as electric fencing, and, in some instances, and as a last resort, lethal predator control to restore ecosystem balance. Diolch.

Samuel Kurtz to respond.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Diolch, Llywydd. I'm very grateful to all Members who've contributed to the debate, and this is debate that, as the Minister referenced, and Vikki Howells referenced, is one that we had at Stage 2. I'd like to think that the debate was conducted in a positive manner and that it never strayed into anything personal, and I commend the Member on that, and I hope that she would feel the same, given this discussion. I can see her nodding along, so I'm grateful for that.
My real concern is the inability, however, to differentiate between a snare and a humane cable restraint, and when the terminology of a 'so-called humane cable restraint' is used, that goes against the own guidance that Welsh Government have produced previously in the definition of a humane cable restraint. It's so limiting in trying to have a positive discussion around the restoration of species; where the data and evidence like that is not brought forward in a manner that is helpful, it just dilutes the debate in that sense.
But, in terms of the governance of this, sometimes being in Government means taking difficult and unpopular decisions for the greater good of a species restoration. That is what this is. It's not something that we advocate for freely and knowingly, and the snares are not what we are advocating for; we are advocating for the very code-compliant snares that this Government has previously advocated the use of, in a hugely controlled and specific licensed way, which would undoubtedly help—the evidence suggests so—species restoration. I'd hate for us to be in here in 10, 15 years' time saying, 'We told you so.' Diolch, Llywydd.

The question is that amendment 44 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. Therefore, we will proceed to a vote on amendment 44. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 14, no abstentions, 38 against. Therefore, amendment 44 is not agreed.

Amendment 44: For: 14, Against: 38, Abstain: 0
Amendment has been rejectedClick to see vote results

The next amendment is amendment 45. Is that being moved, Samuel Kurtz?

Amendment 45 (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Move.

Yes, it is being moved. So, amendment 45. Is there objection? [Objection.] Yes, there is. We will proceed to a vote on amendment 45. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 14, no abstentions, 38 against. Therefore, amendment 45 is not agreed.

Amendment 45: For: 14, Against: 38, Abstain: 0
Amendment has been rejectedClick to see vote results

Amendment 46. Is that being moved, Samuel Kurtz?

Amendment 46 (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Move.

Yes, it's being moved. Amendment 46: is there objection? [Objection.] Yes. We proceed to avote on amendment 46. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 14, no abstentions, 38 against. Amendment 46 is not agreed.

Amendment 46: For: 14, Against: 38, Abstain: 0
Amendment has been rejectedClick to see vote results

Amendment 43. Is that being moved?

Amendment 43 (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Move.

Yes, it's being moved. Is there objection? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection to amendment 43. Open the vote on amendment 43. In favour 14, no abstentions, 38 against. Therefore, amendment 43 is not agreed.

Amendment 43: For: 14, Against: 38, Abstain: 0
Amendment has been rejectedClick to see vote results

Group 12: Regulation-making Powers (Sections 47 and 50) (Amendments 35, 36)

Group 12 is the next group of amendments, and these relate to regulation-making powers in sections 47 and 50. The lead amendment in this group is amendment 35. The Minister, therefore, to move this amendment. Lesley Griffiths.

Amendment 35 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Diolch, Llywydd. Amendments 35 and 36, as tabled in my name, respond directly to recommendation 44, as set out by the LJC committee in their Stage 1 report, and recommendation 2 of the ETRA committee, by applying a superaffirmative procedure to section 50. They also acknowledge the amendment tabled by Sam Kurtz during Stage 2, and meet the commitment to table a superaffirmative procedure at Stage 3.
This amendment recognises the central importance of agriculture and ancillary activity within the Bill, and provides an enhanced layer of scrutiny to the regulation-making power of Welsh Ministers to amend those definitions. The provisions impose additional requirements on the Welsh Ministers before laying regulations under section 50. The amendment includes a requirement to consult any persons appearing to the Welsh Ministers to likely be affected by the regulations on a draft of the proposed regulations. Furthermore, at least 12 weeks must be allowed for the submission of comments. The Welsh Ministers must consider any comments and publish a summary of them.
When the draft regulations are laid before the Senedd, they must be accompanied by a statement that specifies whether there are any differences between the draft consulted on and the one laid before the Senedd. If there are differences, the statement must give details of such differences. The amendment provides the regulations may not be approved by a resolution of the Senedd until after the expiry of 40 days. This period is calculated from the day on which the regulations are laid. When calculating the 40-days period, if the Senedd is dissolved or in recess for more than four days, such period is not to be taken account of for the purposes of calculating the 40 days. This additional process ensures there is additional scrutiny and the transparency we all value. Diolch.

Samuel Kurtz MS: I'm grateful to note that the Minister has tabled amendments 35 and 36 on the topic of changing the definition of agriculture, particularly in respect of the need for a superaffirmative procedure. Members will be delighted to hear that this is the last time I'm speaking during this debate this afternoon. [Interruption.] Thank you very much. But I have to say that I am very grateful to the Minister for her engagement on this during Stage 2, and her commitment to bringing this back at Stage 3, which she has done, and I think that is testament to the Minister's engagement and wider engagement on the agriculture Bill throughout all the stages. I'd also like to take the opportunity to thank the farming unions, NFU Cymru and the FUW, for their engagement and support to my office throughout the whole proceedings of my first legislative journey. So, thank you very much to them as well.
I just want to finally say that this is a landmark piece of legislation. It's Welsh born, it's Welsh bred, it's the first time that Wales has had its own agricultural Bill, and I think it's a highly historic day for agriculture in Wales. Diolch, Llywydd.

The Minister to reply.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Thank you. Thank you very to Sam Kurtz for those remarks. I would like to ask Members to accept amendments 35 and 36 as tabled in my name. They do represent really important changes to this Bill, which respond directly, as I said, to recommendations from both the LJC and ETRA committees.

The question is that amendment 35 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Therefore, amendment 35 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 66, Samuel Kurtz. Is it being moved?

Amendment 66 (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Move.

The question is that amendment 66 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. Therefore, we will proceed to a vote on amendment 66. Open the vote. Close the vote. The vote is tied, therefore I cast my casting vote against amendment 66, as I'm required. And I confirm that the vote outcome is that 26 are in favour and 27 are against. Therefore, amendment 66 is not agreed.

Amendment 66: For: 26, Against: 26, Abstain: 0
As there was an equality of votes, the Llywydd used her casting vote in accordance with Standing Order 6.20(ii).
Amendment has been rejectedClick to see vote results

Amendment 67. Is that being moved?

Amendment 67 (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Move.

Yes, it is. Is there objection? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. Therefore there is a vote on amendment 67. Open the vote. The vote is tied, therefore I use my casting vote against amendment 67, which means that that amendment is not agreed, by 27 votes to 26.

Amendment 67: For: 26, Against: 26, Abstain: 0
As there was an equality of votes, the Llywydd used her casting vote in accordance with Standing Order 6.20(ii).
Amendment has been rejectedClick to see vote results

Therefore, amendment 68 is next. Is it being moved?

Amendment 68 (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Move.

Yes, it is. And is there objection? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. Therefore, we proceed to a vote on amendment 68. Open the vote. The vote is tied, therefore I use my casting vote against amendment 68. The outcome of the vote is that 26 are in favour, 27 are against. And therefore amendment 68 is not agreed.

Amendment 68: For: 26, Against: 26, Abstain: 0
As there was an equality of votes, the Llywydd used her casting vote in accordance with Standing Order 6.20(ii).
Amendment has been rejectedClick to see vote results

Amendment 69. Is that being moved?

Amendment 69 (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Move.

Yes, it's being moved. Is there objection? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. Therefore, open the vote on amendment 69. Close the vote. The vote is tied, therefore I use my casting vote against amendment 69. The outcome of the vote is that there are 26 in favour, 27 against. Therefore, amendment 69 is not agreed.

Amendment 69: For: 26, Against: 26, Abstain: 0
As there was an equality of votes, the Llywydd used her casting vote in accordance with Standing Order 6.20(ii).
Amendment has been rejectedClick to see vote results

Amendment 70. Is that being moved?

Amendment 70 (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Move.

Yes, it's being moved. Is there objection? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. Open the vote on amendment 70. The vote is tied; I use my casting vote against amendment 70. The amendment is not agreed by one vote, by 26 to 27.

Amendment 70: For: 26, Against: 26, Abstain: 0
As there was an equality of votes, the Llywydd used her casting vote in accordance with Standing Order 6.20(ii).
Amendment has been rejectedClick to see vote results

Amendment 71. Is that being moved?

Amendment 71 (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Move.

Yes, it is. Is there objection? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. Therefore, amendment 71 must proceed to a vote. Open the vote.

No, I wasn't looking at you.

The vote is tied, you'll be pleased to hear. And my casting vote is used against amendment 71, and therefore amendment 71 is not agreed.

Amendment 71: For: 26, Against: 26, Abstain: 0
As there was an equality of votes, the Llywydd used her casting vote in accordance with Standing Order 6.20(ii).
Amendment has been rejectedClick to see vote results

Amendment 72. Is that being moved?

Amendment 72 (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Move.

Yes, it is. Is there objection? [Objection.] Yes, there's objection to amendment 72. Thank you. So, the vote is being opened on amendment 72. Open the vote. Close the vote. The vote is tied. I use my casting vote against amendment 72, and therefore, amendment 72 is not agreed.

Amendment 72: For: 26, Against: 26, Abstain: 0
As there was an equality of votes, the Llywydd used her casting vote in accordance with Standing Order 6.20(ii).
Amendment has been rejectedClick to see vote results

Amendment 73, Samuel Kurtz.

Amendment 73 (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Move.

Yes. Is there objection? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection again. Therefore, let's open the vote on amendment 73. The vote is tied. I use my casting vote against amendment 73, therefore amendment 73 is not agreed.

Amendment 73: For: 26, Against: 26, Abstain: 0
As there was an equality of votes, the Llywydd used her casting vote in accordance with Standing Order 6.20(ii).
Amendment has been rejectedClick to see vote results

Amendment 74, Samuel Kurtz.

Amendment 74 (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Move.

Is there objection to amendment 74? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. Therefore, we proceed to a vote on amendment 74. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 15, no abstentions, 37 against. Therefore, amendment 74 is not agreed.

Amendment 74: For: 15, Against: 37, Abstain: 0
Amendment has been rejectedClick to see vote results

Amendment 75—is that being moved, Samuel Kurtz?

Amendment 75 (Samuel Kurtz) moved.

Samuel Kurtz MS: Move.

Yes, it is. Is there objection? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection from the Government. Therefore, we will proceed to a vote on amendment 75. Open the vote. The vote is tied, therefore I use my casting vote against amendment 75. Amendment 75 is not agreed.

Amendment 75: For: 26, Against: 26, Abstain: 0
As there was an equality of votes, the Llywydd used her casting vote in accordance with Standing Order 6.20(ii).
Amendment has been rejectedClick to see vote results

Amendment 36 to be moved by the Minister.

Amendment 36 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Formally.

Yes, it is being moved. Is there objection to amendment 36? No. Therefore, amendment 36 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Amendment 37 to be moved by the Minister.

Amendment 37 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Formally.

Yes, it's moved. Is there objection? No. Therefore, amendment 37 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Group 13: Long Title (Amendment 1)

The final group of amendments, or rather one amendment, is group 13, and that relates to the long title, and I call—. Amendment 1 is the amendment, and I call on the Minister to move the amendment. Amendment 1.

Amendment 1 (Lesley Griffiths) moved.

Lesley Griffiths AC: Diolch, Llywydd. Following the agreement of amendment 5 relating to farm business tenants, I would like to introduce amendment 1 to update the long title of the Bill. This amendment to the Bill's long title inserts a reference to the Agricultural Holdings Act 1986 and the Agricultural Tenancies Act 1995, which are being amended as a consequence of this Bill. The amendment will provide clarity to show amendments will be made to both Acts in connection with the resolution of disputes concerning tenancies.

I have no speakers. I assume the Minister doesn't wish to reply. The question is that amendment 1 be agreed. Does any Member object? There are no objections. Therefore, amendment 1 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

But if I could have your attention for one moment: I have been informed by the Minister for rural affairs that some of the amendments considered and agreed today contain provisions that require the consent of His Majesty. In accordance with Standing Order 26.67, the Senedd must not debate the question whether the Bill be passed until such consent has been signified in a meeting of the Senedd.
As Members will be aware, a motion for the Stage 4 vote on Agriculture (Wales) Bill has been included in the business statement for next Tuesday. That is subject to such consent being obtained and the Senedd being informed. I understand that the Minister will update the Senedd on her intentions for Stage 4 shortly, given that Crown consent is required.
Having said all of that, we have reached the end of our Stage 3 consideration of the Agriculture (Wales) Bill, and I declare that all sections and Schedules of the Bill are deemed agreed. That concludes our business for today.

All sections of the Bill deemed agreed.
The meeting ended at 19:49.

QNR

Questions to the First Minister

John Griffiths: What is the Welsh Government's latest assessment of the effect of social class on life chances in Wales?

Mark Drakeford: We have long recognised that, alongside other factors, social and economic circumstances are shaping contributors to inequality. We are committed to creating a fairer and more prosperous Wales where everyone has the opportunity to reach their potential. This is all the more important in the context of the cost-of-living crisis.

Buffy Williams: What assessment has the First Minister made of how inflation has affected the twenty-first century school building programme?

Mark Drakeford: Inflation inevitably erodes the real value of all Welsh Government capital programmes. In this case, we have increased the programme budget by 33 per cent over the next two financial years to support both our rolling programme delivery and inflationary cost pressures.

Peter Fox: What plans does the Welsh Government have for improving transport infrastructure in Monmouthshire?

Mark Drakeford: We continue to work with Monmouthshire County Council on options to improve transport infrastructure in Chepstow and the A40 in Raglan. Several trunk road locations will also be considered as part of the update to the speed limit review and roll out of the 20 mph speed limits in September 2023.

Luke Fletcher: Will the First Minister provide an update on any further developments on the more detailed review of the Learner Travel (Wales) Measure 2008?

Mark Drakeford: Work has now commenced on this wider review of the Measure. By working in partnership with local authorities, the industry, as well as children and young people, we will identify the barriers as well as opportunities and innovative approaches to inform future policy options for learner travel.